Different cell methods for 6hrPlevPt.prw and CF3hr.prw

[bethdingley]

6hrPlevPt.prw and CF3hr.prw have different cell methods (time: point vs area: mean time: point) but have the same branded name (prw_tpt-u-hxy-u). Should the cell methods for 6hrPlevPt.prw be updated to area: mean time: point?

(spotted by @JamesAnstey ), @taylor13

[JamesAnstey]

Frequency seems to be the only real difference between these two variables - a diff of their metadata gives

                <         "6hrPlevPt.prw": {
                <             "frequency": "6hr",
                ---
                >         "CF3hr.prw": {
                >             "frequency": "3hr",
                6c6
                <             "cell_methods": "time: point",
                ---
                >             "cell_methods": "area: mean time: point",
                8,9c8,9
                <             "long_name": "6 hourly instantaneous vertically integrated water vapor",
                <             "comment": "Vertically integrated mass of water vapour",
                ---
                >             "long_name": "Water Vapor Path",
                >             "comment": "vertically integrated through the atmospheric column",

If we also set long_name and comment to be the same as the 3hr one, then they'll both be consistent with the other instantaneous prw variable, CFsubhr.prw (though I think that one will end up with branded name prw_tpt-u-hs-u because it's a site variable, following #38).

[taylor13]

Yes, 6hrPlevPt.prw and CF3hr.prw should have the same branded variable name, and dimensions and cell_methods. As Beth notes, the 6hrPlevPt.prw cell_methods should be updated to area: mean time: point. I'm not sure if long_name and comment will get transferred to the variable register, but there is no harm in making them consistent too.

[bethdingley]

Thanks both. I've updated the cell methods for 6hrPlevPt.prw to area: mean time: point and made their long name and comment consistent