[CF-metadata] Standard_name for cloud-cover by phenomenon

John Graybeal jgraybeal at ucsd.edu
Mon May 7 09:53:35 MDT 2012


So, anytime I see the word 'type' in a variable name, it catches my eye -- it usually indicates a concept that exists but hasn't been named.  (Because there was *some* reason for grouping the clouds that way, right?)

In this case, I know pretty much nothing about clouds, but it looks to me like the concept may be altitude or height.  If that were true I would much prefer 'high_altitude_cloud_area_fraction' and so on.  Or whatever the right concept is.

John


On May 7, 2012, at 01:29, Heiko Klein wrote:

> Dear Jonathan,
> 
> I just had a short side-discussion with Eizi, and we settled on 'type', i.e. we propose the standard names:
> 
> high_type_cloud_area_fraction
> middle_type_cloud_area_fraction
> low_type_cloud_area_fraction
> 
> 
> As explanatory text, the one of cloud_area_fraction is a good start, and then an addition like:
> 
>  high type clouds are: Cirrus, Cirrostratus, Cirrocumulus
>  middle type clouds are: Altostratus, Altocumulus, Nimbostratus
>  low type clouds are: Stratus, Stratocumulus, Cumulus, Cumulonimbus
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Heiko
> 
> On 2012-04-27 17:30, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
>> Dear Eizi and Heiko
>> 
>> I think this kind of idea is good
>>>> high_genera_cloud_area_fraction:
>> etc.
>> 
>> "type" or "genera" would both be OK, but "genera" is a plural so better English
>> would probably be "type" (or "genus").
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> 






More information about the CF-metadata mailing list