Sorry, my terminological mistake in this community (where I come from,
what CF calls a 'standard name' is just another type of variable name,
but with a specialized purpose).
I think I get it (and I think my comment still applies).
At 10:59 AM -0600 9/18/07, John Caron wrote:
John Graybeal wrote:
That seems useful for models but not so much for observations
(which typically don't conform to, say, atmospheric surfaces). More
to the point, for me at least, the conflation of location with
variable name -- I have to name this varable one thing if I measure
it here, but then I move my instrument and my variable is now called
something else -- is not a viable general-purpose mechanism for
Jonathan was talking about an optional "standard name", not variable names.
John Graybeal <mailto:graybeal@xxxxxxxxx> -- 831-775-1956
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
Marine Metadata Initiative: http://marinemetadata.org ||
Shore Side Data System: http://www.mbari.org/ssds