Open martinjuckes opened 5 years ago
Above raised on CF discussion list ... not much appetite for change (or even reading the question .... ): majority view is that it is our problem and people should not be confused by the fact that area_fraction
is not a fraction (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2019/020736.html ).
There is a related issue that some area_fraction
variables use a specific variation of the standard name, while others use the generic area_fraction
name and an auxillary coordinate to specify what the fraction/percentage refers to. Discussed here: https://github.com/cmip6dr/CMIP6_DataRequest_VariableDefinitions/issues/388 . This means we have two ways of presenting essentially the same information. Not ideal ... but perhaps clearer presentation is the best way forward.
Marked as a schema issue because we may want to include, for example, the information "it is an area fraction" as a specific citable item in the schema, with a range of implementation options.
The standard name
area_fraction
causes a lot of confusion when used with units of%
. Could this be modified to, e.g.,area_cover
?