Talk:Air Quality/Chemistry Naming Conventions

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
General discussion on Air Quality/Chemistry Naming Conventions. If needed, parctice editing in the Sandbox
  • To add to the discussion, log in to DataFed wiki
  • Begin each entry with ====Username: Subject====
  • To respond, add dots ====......Username: Subject====
  • Indent response text by adding : for each tab.
  • Sign your entry by ending with '~~~~',



CTextor: CF Naming Extensions[edit source | reply | new]

I am in charge to organise the definition of new names for the CF convention, both as an outcome of our Ispra HTAP meeting as well as by the EU-project GEMS. Do you have any information on what the status of naming conventions for aerosol&chemicals is? I have recently sent an email to Jonathan Gregory and Bryan Lawrence (see below). ChristianeTextor 19:26, 10 May 2006 (EDT)

......FDetener: ACCENT Photocomp and O3 RF[edit source | reply | new]

I give you the link to the ACCENT Photocomp input/output requirements. Also have a look at the O3 RF. I guess we should discriminate between:
a) components (and derived components)
b) fluxes (e.g. O3 deposition, strat-trop, chemical production, chemical destruction)
c) state variables like temperature, pressure, (and derived) radiative forcing
d) model info lon-lat structure, etc. FrankDetener

......JGregory: CF Development[edit source | reply | new]

Now CF is quite widely used, it is recognised that more explicit arrangements are needed for governing its development and giving it status and permanence. The original authors and others have been discussing how to do this. Something should be in place before long.
As regards the development of standard names for chemistry and aerosol, I would suggest that the work done by Peter van Velthoven for PRISM is a good starting point. A good deal of thought was invested in that. However, since not many chemical names have so far been added, as you remark, these guidelines are only proposals, not requirements. (*See response by CTextor)JonathanGregory 17:28, 17 May 2006 (EDT)

......RHusar: Additional Naming Information[edit source | reply | new]

Christiane, thank you for your note on CF naming extensions. Your work will be a very important part of developing interoperability among projects, programs, agencies and countries. Given the formal consensus-based procedures and the broad acceptance of the CF conventions in the met/ocean communities, it is a very attractive model for creating an Air Chemistry extension to the existing Standard Names.
In order to collect the information on this topic, we have set up this wiki page. It lists the standard air chemistry names in the CF convention (as of April 7, 2006). It is evident that the current list is very limited and it clearly requires expansion to accommodate the needs of this HTAP/GEMS project as well as the needs for other air quality/chemistry-related names.
I do not have a direct interaction with the CF naming custodians, however I gather from the website that there is a particular e-mail address where naming requests are submitted. The wiki page on air quality/chemistry naming also contains links three additional standard name collections:
  • EPA Air Quality System (AQS)
  • Supersite Project Naming Standards
  • PRISM Project Naming Standards
I hope that this information will be of use. Clearly this is a major and thankless undertaking since it is so hard to do it "right" for every one's satisfaction. In order to distribute labor we have set up the above wiki pages where interested work group participants can enter links as well as descriptions through the open wiki process. If you would prefer to maintain such an interactive web page as part of your GEMS project we would be more than happy to make our contributions to those pages. (*See KHalliday Response) Rhusar 19:30, 10 May 2006 (EDT)