-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Harmonise some canonical units #238
Comments
Thank you for your proposal. These terms will be added to the cfeditor (http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1) shortly. Your proposal will then be reviewed and commented on by the community and Standard Names moderator. |
Thank you for pointing this out Lars. This appears to have been an error, and all 21 names have been changed to express their units with inverse
I have marked these as accepted as the only change necessary was to the unit notation. These changes should be published in the next release of the Standard Name table (v88), which is expected in December 2024/January 2025. |
Most of the changes agreed here have been implemented in v88 of the standard name table. I accidentally missed a few: Apologies, this was due to human error on my part - I have queued them up again in the CF editor and these last few will be included in the next standard names update on January 20th/21st. Best wishes, |
All the changes proposed in this issue have been published in versions 88 and 89 of the standard name table so closing this one now. |
I just saw that for some of the standard names the canonical units use division
/
notation rather than "inversion-1
notation". Is there a specific reason for this? Else it might be useful to change to the latter.Here is a table of the ones I have found:
Moreover, I also found two more that use the full unit string
radian
ratherrad
, which is used elsewhere in the table. Same here, if there is not specific reason for this, I suggest changing these too.Kind regards,
Lars
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: