-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
[release/v1] Fourth major update in v1 branch: Rename long_name --> description, expand list of abbreviations, update descriptions
#116
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
15 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a9715b2
Update descriptions for RRTM and RRTMGP entries
mkavulich cc0eb96
simplified arakawa schubert --> sas
mkavulich c268f7a
Finish updating the list of common abbreviations, extend descriptions…
mkavulich 6fb1b46
Convert "long_name" to "description", including updates to write_stan…
mkavulich 4772450
Clarify the use of the "description" field a bit
mkavulich f271f77
Disallow duplicate descriptions as well
mkavulich e0c1f89
Clarify that "description" should be unique
mkavulich 5d24213
Fix failing CI tests
mkavulich c241a98
Apply suggestions from Jesse's code review
mkavulich c2fe4b8
Apply suggestions from code review
mkavulich 709fb1e
More suggestions from Jesses review
mkavulich d25f04c
Rest of the suggestions from Jesses review
mkavulich d8ca2f8
Rename last vestiges of "long name" to "description"
mkavulich 2606d8e
Update StandardNamesRules.rst
mkavulich 0ca4d09
Clarify long_name description with link to CCPP technical doc
mkavulich File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add a sentence to this section to explain what the long name is as opposed to the description, where it is being used, please? It's entirely unclear from this paragraph that the description is for the purpose of the ESMStandardNames repo only, whereas the long_name is for the actual metadata tables only.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@climbfuji I'm having some trouble coming up with some satisfying wording here. Right now I think the mention of "long_name" adds more confusion than it resolves. Would it make sense to just remove the reference to "long_name" all together, since with this proposed change it would no longer be a part of the Standard Names? That way we can just say the following, which I believe is clear and unambiguous:
If you have other suggestions (general or specific) I welcome them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would describe what the "description" field is about and say that the description field is not to be confused with the long_name field that is used in the actual metadata in the CCPP physics implementation in models, and then refer the reader to the CCPP technical documentation for details?