[CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

[m***@stfc.ac.uk]

Hello All,

The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?

regards,
Martin

[a***@stfc.ac.uk]

Dear Martin,

Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.

Best wishes,
Alison

From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu; Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Hello All,

The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?

regards,
Martin

[a***@stfc.ac.uk]

Dear Martin, All,

No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.

The name will in future appear as:
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
'Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.'

In response to Martin's proposal I received an email from Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support the Martin's proposal and additionally point out an error that occurs in the definition of the following names:
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads "The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere" even though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar situation currently exists with the standard name sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 - 5 m below the sea surface.

I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was probably included by accident because most "surface" standard names do indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions of these three names at the next standard name table update unless any objections are received in the meantime.

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@rl.ac.uk>
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.


From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 03 February 2016 15:32
To: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP); cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Dear Martin,

Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.

Best wishes,
Alison

From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu>; Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Hello All,

The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?

regards,
Martin

[Karl Taylor]

Dear Alison and all,

For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating definitively
that it is "not the skin or interface temperature". In most models the
skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are
indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction). I think
it would be more accurate (and less misleading) to say it is "not
*necessarily* the skin or interface temperature". You could also add to
the list "sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it
too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are
evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.

thanks,
Karl

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and
it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the
temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under
sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose
standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and
surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at
a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature
with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
In response to Martin’s proposal I received an email from Craig Donlon
(original proposer of many of the current sea_surface_X_temperature
names). Craig and his team support the Martin’s proposal and
additionally point out an error that occurs in the definition of the
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads “The surface called "surface" means
the lower boundary of the atmosphere” even though the temperatures are
not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to
delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a
similar situation currently exists with the standard name
sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature
generally refers to a depth of 1 – 5 m below the sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was
probably included by accident because most “surface” standard names do
indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and
whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the
definitions of these three names at the next standard name table
update unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*From:*Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 03 February 2016 15:32
*Subject:* RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction
of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the
definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your
suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven
days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the
standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
*From:*Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 02 February 2016 16:07
Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Subject:* Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement
that it is "./... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is
surface_temperature/". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard
name of the skin temperature is/sea_surface_skin_temperature/, not
/surface_temperature/. Can the definition be modified to read ".. /not
the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively/"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

[a***@stfc.ac.uk]

Dear Karl,

Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this right before I make any changes in the standard name table.

I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use the word "skin" as being synonymous with the interface at the bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast, the observational community have a very specific definition for the sea skin: "the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea interface". So I think there is scope for some confusion here since the more specific sea surface temperature names were introduced.

As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular name should be used and to explain the relationships between similar names. I take your point that some models may be deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this case it would be directly comparable with a variable with standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain that in the definition.

Do models ever output variables that you would actually want label as "skin", "subskin" or "foundation" temperatures (as defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it is best to simply note in the definition that the other names exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids the issue around the word "skin".

These points would then lead to a definition something like the following:
'Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the same in ice free sea areas. The standard names sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are often used to describe satellite observations. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.'

Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@rl.ac.uk>
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.


From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Karl Taylor
Sent: 02 March 2016 20:26
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Dear Alison and all,

For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature". In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface temperature". You could also add to the list "sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.

thanks,
Karl

On 3/2/16 9:40 AM, ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@stfc.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Martin, All,

No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.

The name will in future appear as:
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
'Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.'

In response to Martin's proposal I received an email from Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support the Martin's proposal and additionally point out an error that occurs in the definition of the following names:
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads "The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere" even though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar situation currently exists with the standard name sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 - 5 m below the sea surface.

I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was probably included by accident because most "surface" standard names do indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions of these three names at the next standard name table update unless any objections are received in the meantime.

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@rl.ac.uk>
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.


From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 03 February 2016 15:32
To: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP); cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu>
Subject: RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Dear Martin,

Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.

Best wishes,
Alison

From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu>; Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Hello All,

The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?

regards,
Martin




_______________________________________________

CF-metadata mailing list

CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu>

http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

[Craig Donlon]

Dear Alison and Karl:

Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere, begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the different SST variables becomes readily apparent.

I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?

Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.

Regards
Craig

--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands

e: ***@esa.int
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use the word “skin” as being synonymous with the interface at the bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast, the observational community have a very specific definition for the sea skin: “the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea interface”. So I think there is scope for some confusion here since the more specific sea surface temperature names were introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular name should be used and to explain the relationships between similar names. I take your point that some models may be deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this case it would be directly comparable with a variable with standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want label as “skin”, “subskin” or “foundation” temperatures (as defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it is best to simply note in the definition that the other names exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids the issue around the word “skin”.
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the same in ice free sea areas. The standard names sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are often used to describe satellite observations. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Sent: 02 March 2016 20:26
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature". In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface temperature". You could also add to the list "sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads “The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere” even though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar situation currently exists with the standard name sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 – 5 m below the sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was probably included by accident because most “surface” standard names do indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions of these three names at the next standard name table update unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 03 February 2016 15:32
Subject: RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

[a***@stfc.ac.uk]

Dear Craig and Karl,

Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@rl.ac.uk>
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.


From: Craig Donlon [mailto:***@esa.int]
Sent: 07 March 2016 02:18
To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Cc: ***@llnl.gov; cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu; Kenneth Casey; Peter Minnett; Anne O'Caroll; Edward Armstrong
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Dear Alison and Karl:

Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere, begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the different SST variables becomes readily apparent.

I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?

Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.

Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands


e: ***@esa.int<mailto:***@esa.int>
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit

On 3 Mar 2016, at 19:53, <***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@stfc.ac.uk>> <***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote:
Dear Karl,

Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this right before I make any changes in the standard name table.

I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use the word “skin” as being synonymous with the interface at the bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast, the observational community have a very specific definition for the sea skin: “the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea interface”. So I think there is scope for some confusion here since the more specific sea surface temperature names were introduced.

As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular name should be used and to explain the relationships between similar names. I take your point that some models may be deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this case it would be directly comparable with a variable with standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain that in the definition.

Do models ever output variables that you would actually want label as “skin”, “subskin” or “foundation” temperatures (as defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it is best to simply note in the definition that the other names exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids the issue around the word “skin”.

These points would then lead to a definition something like the following:
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the same in ice free sea areas. The standard names sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are often used to describe satellite observations. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’

Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@rl.ac.uk>
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.


From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Karl Taylor
Sent: 02 March 2016 20:26
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu>
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Dear Alison and all,

For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature". In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface temperature". You could also add to the list "sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.

thanks,
Karl


On 3/2/16 9:40 AM, ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@stfc.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Martin, All,

No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.

The name will in future appear as:
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’

In response to Martin’s proposal I received an email from Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support the Martin’s proposal and additionally point out an error that occurs in the definition of the following names:
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads “The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere” even though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar situation currently exists with the standard name sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 – 5 m below the sea surface.

I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was probably included by accident because most “surface” standard names do indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions of these three names at the next standard name table update unless any objections are received in the meantime.

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:***@rl.ac.uk>
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.


From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 03 February 2016 15:32
To: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP); cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu>
Subject: RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Dear Martin,

Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.

Best wishes,
Alison

From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu>; Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature

Hello All,

The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?

regards,
Martin





_______________________________________________

CF-metadata mailing list

CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu>

http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu>
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.

The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its

content is not permitted.

If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.

Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.



Please consider the environment before printing this email.

[Craig Donlon]

Hi Karl:

Just some background. The definitions introduced for SST are there to avoid the generalised statements about SST that have led to all sorts of complications and confusion in the past. They are the outcome of extensive discussions within the GODAE High Resolution SST community h=and have been relatively stable for some time.

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction).

If you mean the skin then it has a clear definition and it is *not* the same as the interface temperature. We cannot measure the interface temperature but you can model it. The skin and interface SST definitions are designed to stress this aspect.

Also, sea_surface_temperature shall be accompanied by a depth description because SST without a depth assignment is of marginal value due to stratification amongst other aspects.

I think you have everything that you need to use these definitions successfully and appropriately in the modelling community as they are currently defined.


I expect a few other comments from the GHRSST Science Team...

all the best
Craig



--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency
ESTEC/EOP-SME,
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk The Netherlands

t: [phone]
f: [phone]
e: ***@esa.int
m:[phone]
Skype ID:crazit

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Sent: 07 March 2016 02:18
To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere, begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use the word “skin” as being synonymous with the interface at the bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast, the observational community have a very specific definition for the sea skin: “the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea interface”. So I think there is scope for some confusion here since the more specific sea surface temperature names were introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular name should be used and to explain the relationships between similar names. I take your point that some models may be deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this case it would be directly comparable with a variable with standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want label as “skin”, “subskin” or “foundation” temperatures (as defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it is best to simply note in the definition that the other names exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids the issue around the word “skin”.
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the same in ice free sea areas. The standard names sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are often used to describe satellite observations. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Sent: 02 March 2016 20:26
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature". In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface temperature". You could also add to the list "sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads “The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere” even though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar situation currently exists with the standard name sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 – 5 m below the sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was probably included by accident because most “surface” standard names do indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions of these three names at the next standard name table update unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 03 February 2016 15:32
Subject: RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

[Karl Taylor]

Dear Peter, Craig and all,

For observations I am not arguing that all the different ocean
temperature definitions aren't needed. In describing observations I
understand that skin and surface temperature are not identical. My
statement was that by construction (almost all) current models assume
that the temperature is vertically uniform (i.e., the water is perfectly
mixed and homogeneous) throughout the upper most layer, so in *those*
models the statement that the "sea_surface_temperature" is "not the skin
or interface temperature" is *wrong*.

The CF standard name description of "sea_surface_temperature" is
somewhat vague by design: "the temperature of sea water near the
surface". Because it is vague, it *could* defensibly be used to
represent any more precisely defined near-surface temperature, including
"sea_surface_skin_temperature", "sea_surface_subskin_temperature", or
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature".

Even for observations it would be wrong to say "sea water near the
surface is not the skin temperature".

Since skin temperature is near the surface and sea_surface_temperature
is vague, it might in fact be the same as skin temperature (e.g., if
sea_surface_temperature in fact recorded the conductive
diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10-20
micrometers below the air-sea interface). Again, usually in models,
sea_surface_temperature most emphatically does provide the model's best
(only!) estimate of skin temperature.

If the description were changed to read:
"It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and not necessarily the skin temperature".
I would be happy.

Better yet, why not include in the discussion the following points:

1) surface temperature, sea_surface_temperature,
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature are all terms that might apply to the
temperature of sea water.
2) When the temperature represents a horizontal spatial average,
surface_temperature represents the mean of the temperature over all
surface types in the domain, whereas the other temperatures do not.
3) The sea_surface_temperature is imprecise because it represents a
near-surface temperature sampled within (or averaged over) the portion
of the column extending from the surface down to perhaps several
meters. In many ocean models, the temperature does not vary in that
portion of the column so sea_surface_temperature might be the
appropriate standard_name. Note that in this case, if part of the
horizontal domain represented by this temperature is under sea ice, the
temperature would not be the same as surface_temperature (which would
include contributions from the surface of the sea ice).
4) The other CF standard names for ocean temperatures have more precise
definitions, and so those names should be used whenever they apply.

best regards,
Karl

Dear Alison, Craig, Karl et al.,
I have refrained from entering this discussion until now as Craig has
made the points carefully and succinctly. But I think there's a
fundamental issue at stake about what these definitions are for.
My view is that definitions such as these are intended to provide a
framework for communication that accurately but briefly represents our
best understanding of the physics of the upper ocean and lower
atmosphere. Thus, the definitions should not be constrained, or
adapted, to reflect our current measurement or modelling capabilities
as these, we expect, will improve with time. If, at some point in the
future, we learn something new about how the thermal structure of the
upper ocean behaves, then maybe the definitions will have to be
revised, but for now I believe our definitions should be based on our
understanding of the physical behavior of sea water near the air-sea
interface. And this is what we tried to achieve with the GHRSST
definitions.
Best regards,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Minnett
Professor, Department of Ocean Sciences
Speaker, RSMAS School Council.
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031, USA
Chairman, Science Team of the Group for High Resolution Sea-Surface
Temperature (GHRSST)
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/people/faculty-index/?p=peter-minnett
https://www.ghrsst.org/

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more
discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard
name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface
temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*Sent:* 07 March 2016 02:18
*To:* Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Peter Minnett; Anne O'Caroll; Edward Armstrong
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams
need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As
more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere,
begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the
different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered
down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what
he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this
right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation
temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite
radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name
was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use
the word “skin” as being synonymous with the interface at the
bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the
intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast,
the observational community have a very specific definition for
the sea skin: “the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a
depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea
interface”. So I think there is scope for some confusion here
since the more specific sea surface temperature names were
introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing
is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular
name should be used and to explain the relationships between
similar names. I take your point that some models may be
deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which
I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the
interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a
standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this
case it would be directly comparable with a variable with
standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain
that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want
label as “skin”, “subskin” or “foundation” temperatures (as
defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it
is best to simply note in the definition that the other names
exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids
the issue around the word “skin”.
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is
the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the
interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose
standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated
such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the
same in ice free sea areas. The standard names
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the
temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are
often used to describe satellite observations. For the
temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a
standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate
axis should be used.’
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Behalf Of *Karl Taylor
*Sent:* 02 March 2016 20:26
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and
interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating
definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature".
In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free
(i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature
(by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less
misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface
temperature". You could also add to the list
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it
too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are
evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
On 3/2/16 9:40 AM,
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition
change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard
name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface
temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature,
respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.’
In response to Martin’s proposal I received an email from
Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current
sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support
the Martin’s proposal and additionally point out an error
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads “The surface called
"surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere” even
though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the
sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial
sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar
situation currently exists with the standard name
sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that
temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 – 5 m below the
sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I
think it was probably included by accident because most
“surface” standard names do indeed refer to the interface
between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies
beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions
of these three names at the next standard name table update
unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*From:*Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 03 February 2016 15:32
*To:* Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP);
*Subject:* RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the
introduction of the very precisely defined
sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more
generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested
amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven
days the change will be accepted and added at the next update
of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
*From:*Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 02 February 2016 16:07
*To:*
Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Subject:* Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the
statement that it is "./... not the skin temperature, whose
standard name is surface_temperature/". The last phrase here
is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature
is/sea_surface_skin_temperature/, not /surface_temperature/.
Can the definition be modified to read ".. /not the skin or
interface temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
respectively/"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

[John Graybeal]

Just a data point: Back in the day, I was told (on-list I thought) that sea_surface_temperature was effectively deprecated, at least for measurements. I understood that to be the reason for the explicit language that it was _not_ any of the other concepts -- just to make clear people should not be using it.

john

--------------------------------------
John Graybeal

Post by Karl Taylor
Dear Peter, Craig and all,
For observations I am not arguing that all the different ocean temperature definitions aren't needed. In describing observations I understand that skin and surface temperature are not identical. My statement was that by construction (almost all) current models assume that the temperature is vertically uniform (i.e., the water is perfectly mixed and homogeneous) throughout the upper most layer, so in *those* models the statement that the "sea_surface_temperature" is "not the skin or interface temperature" is *wrong*.
The CF standard name description of "sea_surface_temperature" is somewhat vague by design: "the temperature of sea water near the surface". Because it is vague, it *could* defensibly be used to represent any more precisely defined near-surface temperature, including "sea_surface_skin_temperature", "sea_surface_subskin_temperature", or "sea_surface_foundation_temperature".
Even for observations it would be wrong to say "sea water near the surface is not the skin temperature".
Since skin temperature is near the surface and sea_surface_temperature is vague, it might in fact be the same as skin temperature (e.g., if sea_surface_temperature in fact recorded the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10-20 micrometers below the air-sea interface). Again, usually in models, sea_surface_temperature most emphatically does provide the model's best (only!) estimate of skin temperature.
"It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), and not necessarily the skin temperature".
I would be happy.
1) surface temperature, sea_surface_temperature, sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and sea_surface_foundation_temperature are all terms that might apply to the temperature of sea water.
2) When the temperature represents a horizontal spatial average, surface_temperature represents the mean of the temperature over all surface types in the domain, whereas the other temperatures do not.
3) The sea_surface_temperature is imprecise because it represents a near-surface temperature sampled within (or averaged over) the portion of the column extending from the surface down to perhaps several meters. In many ocean models, the temperature does not vary in that portion of the column so sea_surface_temperature might be the appropriate standard_name. Note that in this case, if part of the horizontal domain represented by this temperature is under sea ice, the temperature would not be the same as surface_temperature (which would include contributions from the surface of the sea ice).
4) The other CF standard names for ocean temperatures have more precise definitions, and so those names should be used whenever they apply.
best regards,
Karl

Dear Alison, Craig, Karl et al.,
I have refrained from entering this discussion until now as Craig has made the points carefully and succinctly. But I think there's a fundamental issue at stake about what these definitions are for.
My view is that definitions such as these are intended to provide a framework for communication that accurately but briefly represents our best understanding of the physics of the upper ocean and lower atmosphere. Thus, the definitions should not be constrained, or adapted, to reflect our current measurement or modelling capabilities as these, we expect, will improve with time. If, at some point in the future, we learn something new about how the thermal structure of the upper ocean behaves, then maybe the definitions will have to be revised, but for now I believe our definitions should be based on our understanding of the physical behavior of sea water near the air-sea interface. And this is what we tried to achieve with the GHRSST definitions.
Best regards,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Minnett
Professor, Department of Ocean Sciences
Speaker, RSMAS School Council.
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031, USA
Chairman, Science Team of the Group for High Resolution Sea-Surface Temperature (GHRSST)
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/people/faculty-index/?p=peter-minnett
https://www.ghrsst.org/

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Sent: 07 March 2016 02:18
To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere, begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use the word “skin” as being synonymous with the interface at the bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast, the observational community have a very specific definition for the sea skin: “the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea interface”. So I think there is scope for some confusion here since the more specific sea surface temperature names were introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular name should be used and to explain the relationships between similar names. I take your point that some models may be deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this case it would be directly comparable with a variable with standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want label as “skin”, “subskin” or “foundation” temperatures (as defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it is best to simply note in the definition that the other names exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids the issue around the word “skin”.
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the same in ice free sea areas. The standard names sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are often used to describe satellite observations. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Sent: 02 March 2016 20:26
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature". In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free (i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature (by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface temperature". You could also add to the list "sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature, respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a data variable of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should be used.’
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads “The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere” even though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar situation currently exists with the standard name sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 – 5 m below the sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I think it was probably included by accident because most “surface” standard names do indeed refer to the interface between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions of these three names at the next standard name table update unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 03 February 2016 15:32
Subject: RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the introduction of the very precisely defined sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven days the change will be accepted and added at the next update of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 02 February 2016 16:07
Subject: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the statement that it is ".... not the skin temperature, whose standard name is surface_temperature". The last phrase here is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature is sea_surface_skin_temperature, not surface_temperature. Can the definition be modified to read ".. not the skin or interface temperature, whose standard names are sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature respectively"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

[m***@stfc.ac.uk]

Hello All,

Karl has raised an objection to the wording ".... not the skin ...." which was carried over from the current CF Standard Name definition for sea_surface_temperature in my suggested update. The update is intended to correct a currently erroneous reference to "surface_temperature" as skin temperature. Karl's objection, which also applies to the existing definition (and appears to date back to v1 fo the list), could be accomodated by a simple change:

‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any). More specific terms sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
are available for the skin and interface
temperature respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.’

regards,
Martin



________________________________________
From: CF-metadata [cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu] on behalf of cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu [cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu]
Sent: 08 March 2016 01:46
To: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13

Send CF-metadata mailing list submissions to
cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
cf-metadata-***@cgd.ucar.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CF-metadata digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
(Karl Taylor)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 17:47:05 -0800
From: Karl Taylor <***@llnl.gov>
To: Peter Minnett <***@rsmas.miami.edu>,
***@stfc.ac.uk, ***@esa.int
Cc: cf-***@cgd.ucar.edu, ***@noaa.gov,
***@eumetsat.int, ***@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Message-ID: <***@llnl.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

Dear Peter, Craig and all,

For observations I am not arguing that all the different ocean
temperature definitions aren't needed. In describing observations I
understand that skin and surface temperature are not identical. My
statement was that by construction (almost all) current models assume
that the temperature is vertically uniform (i.e., the water is perfectly
mixed and homogeneous) throughout the upper most layer, so in *those*
models the statement that the "sea_surface_temperature" is "not the skin
or interface temperature" is *wrong*.

The CF standard name description of "sea_surface_temperature" is
somewhat vague by design: "the temperature of sea water near the
surface". Because it is vague, it *could* defensibly be used to
represent any more precisely defined near-surface temperature, including
"sea_surface_skin_temperature", "sea_surface_subskin_temperature", or
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature".

Even for observations it would be wrong to say "sea water near the
surface is not the skin temperature".

Since skin temperature is near the surface and sea_surface_temperature
is vague, it might in fact be the same as skin temperature (e.g., if
sea_surface_temperature in fact recorded the conductive
diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10-20
micrometers below the air-sea interface). Again, usually in models,
sea_surface_temperature most emphatically does provide the model's best
(only!) estimate of skin temperature.

If the description were changed to read:
"It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and not necessarily the skin temperature".
I would be happy.

Better yet, why not include in the discussion the following points:

1) surface temperature, sea_surface_temperature,
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature are all terms that might apply to the
temperature of sea water.
2) When the temperature represents a horizontal spatial average,
surface_temperature represents the mean of the temperature over all
surface types in the domain, whereas the other temperatures do not.
3) The sea_surface_temperature is imprecise because it represents a
near-surface temperature sampled within (or averaged over) the portion
of the column extending from the surface down to perhaps several
meters. In many ocean models, the temperature does not vary in that
portion of the column so sea_surface_temperature might be the
appropriate standard_name. Note that in this case, if part of the
horizontal domain represented by this temperature is under sea ice, the
temperature would not be the same as surface_temperature (which would
include contributions from the surface of the sea ice).
4) The other CF standard names for ocean temperatures have more precise
definitions, and so those names should be used whenever they apply.

best regards,
Karl

Dear Alison, Craig, Karl et al.,
I have refrained from entering this discussion until now as Craig has
made the points carefully and succinctly. But I think there's a
fundamental issue at stake about what these definitions are for.
My view is that definitions such as these are intended to provide a
framework for communication that accurately but briefly represents our
best understanding of the physics of the upper ocean and lower
atmosphere. Thus, the definitions should not be constrained, or
adapted, to reflect our current measurement or modelling capabilities
as these, we expect, will improve with time. If, at some point in the
future, we learn something new about how the thermal structure of the
upper ocean behaves, then maybe the definitions will have to be
revised, but for now I believe our definitions should be based on our
understanding of the physical behavior of sea water near the air-sea
interface. And this is what we tried to achieve with the GHRSST
definitions.
Best regards,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Minnett
Professor, Department of Ocean Sciences
Speaker, RSMAS School Council.
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031, USA
Chairman, Science Team of the Group for High Resolution Sea-Surface
Temperature (GHRSST)
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/people/faculty-index/?p=peter-minnett
https://www.ghrsst.org/

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more
discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard
name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface
temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*Sent:* 07 March 2016 02:18
*To:* Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Peter Minnett; Anne O'Caroll; Edward Armstrong
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams
need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As
more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere,
begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the
different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered
down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what
he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this
right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation
temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite
radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name
was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use
the word ?skin? as being synonymous with the interface at the
bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the
intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast,
the observational community have a very specific definition for
the sea skin: ?the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a
depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea
interface?. So I think there is scope for some confusion here
since the more specific sea surface temperature names were
introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing
is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular
name should be used and to explain the relationships between
similar names. I take your point that some models may be
deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which
I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the
interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a
standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this
case it would be directly comparable with a variable with
standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain
that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want
label as ?skin?, ?subskin? or ?foundation? temperatures (as
defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it
is best to simply note in the definition that the other names
exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids
the issue around the word ?skin?.
These points would then lead to a definition something like the
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is
the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the
interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose
standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated
such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the
same in ice free sea areas. The standard names
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the
temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are
often used to describe satellite observations. For the
temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a
standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate
axis should be used.?
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Behalf Of *Karl Taylor
*Sent:* 02 March 2016 20:26
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and
interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating
definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature".
In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free
(i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature
(by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less
misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface
temperature". You could also add to the list
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it
too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are
evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
On 3/2/16 9:40 AM,
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition
change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard
name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface
temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature,
respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.?
In response to Martin?s proposal I received an email from
Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current
sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support
the Martin?s proposal and additionally point out an error
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads ?The surface called
"surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere? even
though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the
sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial
sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar
situation currently exists with the standard name
sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that
temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 ? 5 m below the
sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I
think it was probably included by accident because most
?surface? standard names do indeed refer to the interface
between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies
beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions
of these three names at the next standard name table update
unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*From:*Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 03 February 2016 15:32
*To:* Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP);
*Subject:* RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the
introduction of the very precisely defined
sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more
generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested
amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven
days the change will be accepted and added at the next update
of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
*From:*Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 02 February 2016 16:07
*To:*
Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Subject:* Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the
statement that it is "./... not the skin temperature, whose
standard name is surface_temperature/". The last phrase here
is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature
is/sea_surface_skin_temperature/, not /surface_temperature/.
Can the definition be modified to read ".. /not the skin or
interface temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
respectively/"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20160307/103d84ac/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-***@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata


------------------------------

End of CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
********************************************

[Craig Donlon]

Genius and sounds like a good solution to me.

Regards
Craig

--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands

e: ***@esa.int
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
Hello All,
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any). More specific terms sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
are available for the skin and interface
temperature respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.’
regards,
Martin
________________________________________
Sent: 08 March 2016 01:46
Subject: CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
Send CF-metadata mailing list submissions to
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
You can reach the person managing the list at
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CF-metadata digest..."
1. Re: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
(Karl Taylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 17:47:05 -0800
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Dear Peter, Craig and all,
For observations I am not arguing that all the different ocean
temperature definitions aren't needed. In describing observations I
understand that skin and surface temperature are not identical. My
statement was that by construction (almost all) current models assume
that the temperature is vertically uniform (i.e., the water is perfectly
mixed and homogeneous) throughout the upper most layer, so in *those*
models the statement that the "sea_surface_temperature" is "not the skin
or interface temperature" is *wrong*.
The CF standard name description of "sea_surface_temperature" is
somewhat vague by design: "the temperature of sea water near the
surface". Because it is vague, it *could* defensibly be used to
represent any more precisely defined near-surface temperature, including
"sea_surface_skin_temperature", "sea_surface_subskin_temperature", or
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature".
Even for observations it would be wrong to say "sea water near the
surface is not the skin temperature".
Since skin temperature is near the surface and sea_surface_temperature
is vague, it might in fact be the same as skin temperature (e.g., if
sea_surface_temperature in fact recorded the conductive
diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10-20
micrometers below the air-sea interface). Again, usually in models,
sea_surface_temperature most emphatically does provide the model's best
(only!) estimate of skin temperature.
"It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and not necessarily the skin temperature".
I would be happy.
1) surface temperature, sea_surface_temperature,
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature are all terms that might apply to the
temperature of sea water.
2) When the temperature represents a horizontal spatial average,
surface_temperature represents the mean of the temperature over all
surface types in the domain, whereas the other temperatures do not.
3) The sea_surface_temperature is imprecise because it represents a
near-surface temperature sampled within (or averaged over) the portion
of the column extending from the surface down to perhaps several
meters. In many ocean models, the temperature does not vary in that
portion of the column so sea_surface_temperature might be the
appropriate standard_name. Note that in this case, if part of the
horizontal domain represented by this temperature is under sea ice, the
temperature would not be the same as surface_temperature (which would
include contributions from the surface of the sea ice).
4) The other CF standard names for ocean temperatures have more precise
definitions, and so those names should be used whenever they apply.
best regards,
Karl

Dear Alison, Craig, Karl et al.,
I have refrained from entering this discussion until now as Craig has
made the points carefully and succinctly. But I think there's a
fundamental issue at stake about what these definitions are for.
My view is that definitions such as these are intended to provide a
framework for communication that accurately but briefly represents our
best understanding of the physics of the upper ocean and lower
atmosphere. Thus, the definitions should not be constrained, or
adapted, to reflect our current measurement or modelling capabilities
as these, we expect, will improve with time. If, at some point in the
future, we learn something new about how the thermal structure of the
upper ocean behaves, then maybe the definitions will have to be
revised, but for now I believe our definitions should be based on our
understanding of the physical behavior of sea water near the air-sea
interface. And this is what we tried to achieve with the GHRSST
definitions.
Best regards,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Minnett
Professor, Department of Ocean Sciences
Speaker, RSMAS School Council.
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031, USA
Chairman, Science Team of the Group for High Resolution Sea-Surface
Temperature (GHRSST)
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/people/faculty-index/?p=peter-minnett
https://www.ghrsst.org/

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more
discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard
name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface
temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*Sent:* 07 March 2016 02:18
*To:* Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Peter Minnett; Anne O'Caroll; Edward Armstrong
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams
need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As
more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere,
begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the
different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered
down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what
he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this
right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation
temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite
radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name
was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use
the word ?skin? as being synonymous with the interface at the
bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the
intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast,
the observational community have a very specific definition for
the sea skin: ?the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a
depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea
interface?. So I think there is scope for some confusion here
since the more specific sea surface temperature names were
introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing
is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular
name should be used and to explain the relationships between
similar names. I take your point that some models may be
deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which
I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the
interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a
standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this
case it would be directly comparable with a variable with
standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain
that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want
label as ?skin?, ?subskin? or ?foundation? temperatures (as
defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it
is best to simply note in the definition that the other names
exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids
the issue around the word ?skin?.
These points would then lead to a definition something like the
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is
the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the
interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose
standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated
such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the
same in ice free sea areas. The standard names
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the
temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are
often used to describe satellite observations. For the
temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a
standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate
axis should be used.?
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Behalf Of *Karl Taylor
*Sent:* 02 March 2016 20:26
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and
interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating
definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature".
In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free
(i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature
(by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less
misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface
temperature". You could also add to the list
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it
too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are
evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
On 3/2/16 9:40 AM,
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition
change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard
name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface
temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature,
respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.?
In response to Martin?s proposal I received an email from
Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current
sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support
the Martin?s proposal and additionally point out an error
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads ?The surface called
"surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere? even
though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the
sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial
sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar
situation currently exists with the standard name
sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that
temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 ? 5 m below the
sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I
think it was probably included by accident because most
?surface? standard names do indeed refer to the interface
between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies
beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions
of these three names at the next standard name table update
unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*From:*Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 03 February 2016 15:32
*To:* Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP);
*Subject:* RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the
introduction of the very precisely defined
sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more
generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested
amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven
days the change will be accepted and added at the next update
of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
*From:*Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 02 February 2016 16:07
*To:*
Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Subject:* Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the
statement that it is "./... not the skin temperature, whose
standard name is surface_temperature/". The last phrase here
is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature
is/sea_surface_skin_temperature/, not /surface_temperature/.
Can the definition be modified to read ".. /not the skin or
interface temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
respectively/"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20160307/103d84ac/attachment.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
------------------------------
End of CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
********************************************
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

[Karl Taylor]

Hi all,

I, for one, would find Martin's wording an improvement and with the
addition of "subskin" temperature complete (adding "subskin" to one of
Martin's sentences):

"More specific terms, namely sea_surface_skin_temperature,
sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and surface_termperature are available
for the skin, subskin, and interface temperature. respectively."

thanks,
Karl

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
Hello All,
‘Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any). More specific terms sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
are available for the skin and interface
temperature respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.’
regards,
Martin
________________________________________
Sent: 08 March 2016 01:46
Subject: CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
Send CF-metadata mailing list submissions to
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
You can reach the person managing the list at
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CF-metadata digest..."
1. Re: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
(Karl Taylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 17:47:05 -0800
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Dear Peter, Craig and all,
For observations I am not arguing that all the different ocean
temperature definitions aren't needed. In describing observations I
understand that skin and surface temperature are not identical. My
statement was that by construction (almost all) current models assume
that the temperature is vertically uniform (i.e., the water is perfectly
mixed and homogeneous) throughout the upper most layer, so in *those*
models the statement that the "sea_surface_temperature" is "not the skin
or interface temperature" is *wrong*.
The CF standard name description of "sea_surface_temperature" is
somewhat vague by design: "the temperature of sea water near the
surface". Because it is vague, it *could* defensibly be used to
represent any more precisely defined near-surface temperature, including
"sea_surface_skin_temperature", "sea_surface_subskin_temperature", or
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature".
Even for observations it would be wrong to say "sea water near the
surface is not the skin temperature".
Since skin temperature is near the surface and sea_surface_temperature
is vague, it might in fact be the same as skin temperature (e.g., if
sea_surface_temperature in fact recorded the conductive
diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10-20
micrometers below the air-sea interface). Again, usually in models,
sea_surface_temperature most emphatically does provide the model's best
(only!) estimate of skin temperature.
"It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and not necessarily the skin temperature".
I would be happy.
1) surface temperature, sea_surface_temperature,
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature are all terms that might apply to the
temperature of sea water.
2) When the temperature represents a horizontal spatial average,
surface_temperature represents the mean of the temperature over all
surface types in the domain, whereas the other temperatures do not.
3) The sea_surface_temperature is imprecise because it represents a
near-surface temperature sampled within (or averaged over) the portion
of the column extending from the surface down to perhaps several
meters. In many ocean models, the temperature does not vary in that
portion of the column so sea_surface_temperature might be the
appropriate standard_name. Note that in this case, if part of the
horizontal domain represented by this temperature is under sea ice, the
temperature would not be the same as surface_temperature (which would
include contributions from the surface of the sea ice).
4) The other CF standard names for ocean temperatures have more precise
definitions, and so those names should be used whenever they apply.
best regards,
Karl

Dear Alison, Craig, Karl et al.,
I have refrained from entering this discussion until now as Craig has
made the points carefully and succinctly. But I think there's a
fundamental issue at stake about what these definitions are for.
My view is that definitions such as these are intended to provide a
framework for communication that accurately but briefly represents our
best understanding of the physics of the upper ocean and lower
atmosphere. Thus, the definitions should not be constrained, or
adapted, to reflect our current measurement or modelling capabilities
as these, we expect, will improve with time. If, at some point in the
future, we learn something new about how the thermal structure of the
upper ocean behaves, then maybe the definitions will have to be
revised, but for now I believe our definitions should be based on our
understanding of the physical behavior of sea water near the air-sea
interface. And this is what we tried to achieve with the GHRSST
definitions.
Best regards,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Minnett
Professor, Department of Ocean Sciences
Speaker, RSMAS School Council.
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031, USA
Chairman, Science Team of the Group for High Resolution Sea-Surface
Temperature (GHRSST)
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/people/faculty-index/?p=peter-minnett
https://www.ghrsst.org/

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more
discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard
name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface
temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*Sent:* 07 March 2016 02:18
*To:* Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Peter Minnett; Anne O'Caroll; Edward Armstrong
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams
need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As
more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere,
begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the
different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered
down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what
he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this
right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation
temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite
radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name
was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use
the word ?skin? as being synonymous with the interface at the
bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the
intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast,
the observational community have a very specific definition for
the sea skin: ?the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a
depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea
interface?. So I think there is scope for some confusion here
since the more specific sea surface temperature names were
introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing
is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular
name should be used and to explain the relationships between
similar names. I take your point that some models may be
deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which
I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the
interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a
standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this
case it would be directly comparable with a variable with
standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain
that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want
label as ?skin?, ?subskin? or ?foundation? temperatures (as
defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it
is best to simply note in the definition that the other names
exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids
the issue around the word ?skin?.
These points would then lead to a definition something like the
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is
the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the
interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose
standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated
such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the
same in ice free sea areas. The standard names
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the
temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are
often used to describe satellite observations. For the
temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a
standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate
axis should be used.?
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
Behalf Of *Karl Taylor
*Sent:* 02 March 2016 20:26
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and
interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating
definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature".
In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free
(i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature
(by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less
misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface
temperature". You could also add to the list
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it
too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are
evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
On 3/2/16 9:40 AM,
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition
change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard
name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface
temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature,
respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.?
In response to Martin?s proposal I received an email from
Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current
sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support
the Martin?s proposal and additionally point out an error
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads ?The surface called
"surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere? even
though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the
sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial
sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar
situation currently exists with the standard name
sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that
temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 ? 5 m below the
sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I
think it was probably included by accident because most
?surface? standard names do indeed refer to the interface
between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies
beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions
of these three names at the next standard name table update
unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*From:*Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 03 February 2016 15:32
*To:* Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP);
*Subject:* RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the
introduction of the very precisely defined
sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more
generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested
amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven
days the change will be accepted and added at the next update
of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
*From:*Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 02 February 2016 16:07
*To:*
Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Subject:* Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the
statement that it is "./... not the skin temperature, whose
standard name is surface_temperature/". The last phrase here
is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature
is/sea_surface_skin_temperature/, not /surface_temperature/.
Can the definition be modified to read ".. /not the skin or
interface temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
respectively/"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3qk9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMtGFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLbQxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20160307/103d84ac/attachment.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
------------------------------
End of CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
********************************************
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

[a***@stfc.ac.uk]

Dear All,

Many thanks for the discussion of this name. I think agreement has been reached on the definition and no further changes have been suggested, so I will accept this name and include it in the standard name table update which is scheduled for today. Full details of today's update will follow shortly.

Best wishes,
Alison

------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: ***@stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

-----Original Message-----
Of Karl Taylor
Sent: 08 March 2016 15:56
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Hi all,
I, for one, would find Martin's wording an improvement and with the
addition of "subskin" temperature complete (adding "subskin" to one of
"More specific terms, namely sea_surface_skin_temperature,
sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and surface_termperature are available
for the skin, subskin, and interface temperature. respectively."
thanks,
Karl

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
Hello All,
Karl has raised an objection to the wording ".... not the skin ...." which was

carried over from the current CF Standard Name definition for
sea_surface_temperature in my suggested update. The update is intended
to correct a currently erroneous reference to "surface_temperature" as skin
temperature. Karl's objection, which also applies to the existing definition
(and appears to date back to v1 fo the list), could be accomodated by a

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
'Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any). More specific terms

sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
are available for the skin and interface
temperature respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.'
regards,
Martin
________________________________________
Sent: 08 March 2016 01:46
Subject: CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
Send CF-metadata mailing list submissions to
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
You can reach the person managing the list at
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CF-metadata digest..."
1. Re: Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
(Karl Taylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 17:47:05 -0800
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Dear Peter, Craig and all,
For observations I am not arguing that all the different ocean
temperature definitions aren't needed. In describing observations I
understand that skin and surface temperature are not identical. My
statement was that by construction (almost all) current models assume
that the temperature is vertically uniform (i.e., the water is perfectly
mixed and homogeneous) throughout the upper most layer, so in *those*
models the statement that the "sea_surface_temperature" is "not the skin
or interface temperature" is *wrong*.
The CF standard name description of "sea_surface_temperature" is
somewhat vague by design: "the temperature of sea water near the
surface". Because it is vague, it *could* defensibly be used to
represent any more precisely defined near-surface temperature, including
"sea_surface_skin_temperature", "sea_surface_subskin_temperature", or
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature".
Even for observations it would be wrong to say "sea water near the
surface is not the skin temperature".
Since skin temperature is near the surface and sea_surface_temperature
is vague, it might in fact be the same as skin temperature (e.g., if
sea_surface_temperature in fact recorded the conductive
diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a depth of approximately 10-20
micrometers below the air-sea interface). Again, usually in models,
sea_surface_temperature most emphatically does provide the model's

best

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
(only!) estimate of skin temperature.
"It is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and not necessarily the skin temperature".
I would be happy.
1) surface temperature, sea_surface_temperature,
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature, and
sea_surface_foundation_temperature are all terms that might apply to the
temperature of sea water.
2) When the temperature represents a horizontal spatial average,
surface_temperature represents the mean of the temperature over all
surface types in the domain, whereas the other temperatures do not.
3) The sea_surface_temperature is imprecise because it represents a
near-surface temperature sampled within (or averaged over) the portion
of the column extending from the surface down to perhaps several
meters. In many ocean models, the temperature does not vary in that
portion of the column so sea_surface_temperature might be the
appropriate standard_name. Note that in this case, if part of the
horizontal domain represented by this temperature is under sea ice, the
temperature would not be the same as surface_temperature (which

would

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
include contributions from the surface of the sea ice).
4) The other CF standard names for ocean temperatures have more precise
definitions, and so those names should be used whenever they apply.
best regards,
Karl

Dear Alison, Craig, Karl et al.,
I have refrained from entering this discussion until now as Craig has
made the points carefully and succinctly. But I think there's a
fundamental issue at stake about what these definitions are for.
My view is that definitions such as these are intended to provide a
framework for communication that accurately but briefly represents our
best understanding of the physics of the upper ocean and lower
atmosphere. Thus, the definitions should not be constrained, or
adapted, to reflect our current measurement or modelling capabilities
as these, we expect, will improve with time. If, at some point in the
future, we learn something new about how the thermal structure of the
upper ocean behaves, then maybe the definitions will have to be
revised, but for now I believe our definitions should be based on our
understanding of the physical behavior of sea water near the air-sea
interface. And this is what we tried to achieve with the GHRSST
definitions.
Best regards,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Minnett
Professor, Department of Ocean Sciences
Speaker, RSMAS School Council.
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031, USA
Chairman, Science Team of the Group for High Resolution Sea-Surface
Temperature (GHRSST)
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/people/faculty-index/?p=peter-minnett
https://www.ghrsst.org/

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Dear Craig and Karl,
Thanks both for your comments. It is clear that we need some more
discussion on this topic. I will be making an update to the standard
name table tomorrow but will defer any changes to the sea surface
temperature names until we can all agree a position on this.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*Sent:* 07 March 2016 02:18
*To:* Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Peter Minnett; Anne O'Caroll; Edward Armstrong
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Thanks for the discussion here. The key issue is that model teams
need to be more precise as to which SST variable is being used. As
more advanced systems begin to fully couple ocean and atmosphere,
begin to perform radiance assimilation etc the need for each of the
different SST variables becomes readily apparent.
I would not like to see any of the current CF SST definitions watered
down in the manner proposed. But rather to ask Karl to define what
he means by SST in the modelling context that he is working?
Then we may hope to resolve the issue efficiently.
Regards
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Craig Donlon
Sentinel-3 Mission Scientist,
Principal Scientist for Oceans and Ice
European Space Agency/ESTEC
Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ
Noordwijk
The Netherlands
t: [phone]
f: [phone]
m: [phone]
Skype: crazit
Dear Karl,
Thanks for your comments on this. Clearly we need to get this
right before I make any changes in the standard name table.
I recall that the sea surface skin, subskin and foundation
temperatures were introduced primarily to describe satellite
radiometer data because the existing sea_surface_temperature name
was too vague. I have the impression that modellers sometimes use
the word ?skin? as being synonymous with the interface at the
bottom of the atmosphere and I think that was probably the
intention behind its use in the current definition. By contrast,
the observational community have a very specific definition for
the sea skin: ?the conductive diffusion-dominated sub-layer at a
depth of approximately 10 - 20 micrometers below the air-sea
interface?. So I think there is scope for some confusion here
since the more specific sea surface temperature names were
introduced.
As far as standard name definitions are concerned, the main thing
is to ensure we provide clear guidance as to when a particular
name should be used and to explain the relationships between
similar names. I take your point that some models may be
deliberately formulated to have sea_surface_temperature (by which
I assume you mean the top layer of the model) the same as the
interface temperature. I assume you would still label it with a
standard name of sea_surface_temperature, even though in this
case it would be directly comparable with a variable with
standard name surface_temperature and we should probably explain
that in the definition.
Do models ever output variables that you would actually want
label as ?skin?, ?subskin? or ?foundation? temperatures (as
defined in the existing standard names)? If not, then perhaps it
is best to simply note in the definition that the other names
exist and that they have very specific definitions. This avoids
the issue around the word ?skin?.
These points would then lead to a definition something like the
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It is
the temperature of sea water near the surface (including the part
under sea-ice, if any), and is not necessarily the same as the
interface temperature at the bottom of the atmosphere, whose
standard name is surface_temperature. Some models are formulated
such that sea_surface_temperature and surface_temperature are the
same in ice free sea areas. The standard names
sea_surface_skin_temperature, sea_surface_subskin_temperature

and

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
sea_surface_foundation_temperature can be used to describe the
temperature in specific layers close to the sea surface and are
often used to describe satellite observations. For the
temperature of sea water at a particular depth or layer, a
standard name of sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate
axis should be used.?
Does that sound OK? Does it include all the necessary information?
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

*On

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Behalf Of *Karl Taylor
*Sent:* 02 March 2016 20:26
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Confusing skin temperature and
interface temperature
Dear Alison and all,
For "sea_surface_temperature", there is a problem stating
definitively that it is "not the skin or interface temperature".
In most models the skin and interface temperatures over ice-free
(i.e., open) ocean are indeed the same as sea_surface_temperature
(by construction). I think it would be more accurate (and less
misleading) to say it is "not *necessarily* the skin or interface
temperature". You could also add to the list
"sea_surface_foundation_temperature" here because in models it
too is often the same as sea_surface_temperature". Models are
evolving, so this might not indefinitely be the case.
thanks,
Karl
On 3/2/16 9:40 AM,
Dear Martin, All,
No objections have been received to the proposed definition
change and it is now accepted for publication in the standard
name table.
sea_surface_temperature (canonical units: K)
?Sea surface temperature is usually abbreviated as "SST". It
is the temperature of sea water near the surface (including
the part under sea-ice, if any), not the skin or interface
temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature,
respectively. For the temperature of sea water at a
particular depth or layer, a data variable of
sea_water_temperature with a vertical coordinate axis should
be used.?
In response to Martin?s proposal I received an email from
Craig Donlon (original proposer of many of the current
sea_surface_X_temperature names). Craig and his team support
the Martin?s proposal and additionally point out an error
sea_surface_skin_temperature
sea_surface_subskin_temperature
in which the first sentence reads ?The surface called
"surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere? even
though the temperatures are not in fact measured at the
sea-air boundary. The suggestion is to delete the initial
sentence from the definitions. I note also that a similar
situation currently exists with the standard name
sea_surface_foundation_temperature even though that
temperature generally refers to a depth of 1 ? 5 m below the
sea surface.
I agree with Craig that the sentence should be deleted. I
think it was probably included by accident because most
?surface? standard names do indeed refer to the interface
between the bottom of the atmosphere and whatever lies
beneath. I plan to remove the sentence from the definitions
of these three names at the next standard name table update
unless any objections are received in the meantime.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: [phone]
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
*From:*Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 03 February 2016 15:32
*To:* Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP);
*Subject:* RE: Confusing skin temperature and interface
temperature
Dear Martin,
Thank you for pointing this out. I agree that since the
introduction of the very precisely defined
sea_surface_skin_temperature name, the definition of the more
generic name is confusing. I agree with your suggested
amendment and unless anyone objects within the next seven
days the change will be accepted and added at the next update
of the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
*From:*Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Sent:* 02 February 2016 16:07
*To:*
Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
*Subject:* Confusing skin temperature and interface temperature
Hello All,
The CF Standard Name sea_surface_temperature includes the
statement that it is "./... not the skin temperature, whose
standard name is surface_temperature/". The last phrase here
is incorrect: the standard name of the skin temperature
is/sea_surface_skin_temperature/, not /surface_temperature/.
Can the definition be modified to read ".. /not the skin or
interface temperature, whose standard names are
sea_surface_skin_temperature and surface_temperature
respectively/"?
regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-

web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3q
k9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371
F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-
Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-
_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMt
GFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-
wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/
https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-
3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-
2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-
uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-
PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2
U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLb
QxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
<https://secure-

web.cisco.com/1tuODHTnfdQ3sBhVdVtvQSRkyRmHIs9nvDADRmlFauFKml3q
k9suIDfvTfeaDbFvmmncKjtjbyKsUT696sKnywSfQl2F1aeExC32Qo65czODh371
F727iG8p6JM2cyauMFthLR0SGuMC4dnKAqFSEJcOQeeGq5Pd614l-
Dkqt4fDmUBH9kxN1hyWZNw7jc7tAXy-CpfArd-
_VhK8fgSClUBCVXnHSWo9Jun3YWYnrYPt_7Is6tg_F6fj_p0NXmsD90_RrEjmMt
GFwm9ht_KSX7DVwq52ngiWskMa01iQgRVMYMv-
wFTQ18pJDOkdYlDOhNPblHz41WQS3FThueazQyMeq1LTXB8BarYL7nFT3nsw/
https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-
3A__mailman.cgd.ucar.edu_mailman_listinfo_cf-
2Dmetadata%26d%3DCwMGaQ%26c%3Dy2w-
uYmhgFWijp_IQN0DhA%26r%3D0HNmq-
PhkIBTp_Xo64DQvi0_M2lu06wIxOH1nNI6YOw%26m%3DON5hyu_fyflzAK5_2
U73gXzNgww_VIv7ajRFMgifvOg%26s%3DbUyWPFXYNpVO8MbSCXOZsv6jLb
QxCa3zOgGs7XlKk4I%26e%3D>

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the

addressee or addressees only.

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in

whole or in part) of its

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and

delete it from your system.

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the

sender.

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk

Post by a***@stfc.ac.uk
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-

metadata/attachments/20160307/103d84ac/attachment.html>

Post by m***@stfc.ac.uk
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
------------------------------
End of CF-metadata Digest, Vol 155, Issue 13
********************************************
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

[m***@stfc.ac.uk]

Hello All,

I'm happy with Karl's suggestion: including "subskin" in the list is a clear improvement,

cheers,
Martin