We do not need to stick to WW3 variable names or limit the number of characters in variables. All variable names should be examined to see if expanding them to something more informative would be helpful.
Furthermore, I agree and second @ukmo-kitstokes comment in #19:
It would be nice to have a consistent abbreviation for water levels, currents, ice concentration, bottom depth that can be used throughout the code base and enforced in new code. For example, it could be that they use a three letter abbreviation such as wat, cur, ice, bot and that a fourth uppercase letter could be added for a specific flavour of each variable, such as watL, curU, iceC, botD. I feel this would be better than cryptic abbreviations such as bd which could mean a number of things.
We do not need to stick to WW3 variable names or limit the number of characters in variables. All variable names should be examined to see if expanding them to something more informative would be helpful.
Furthermore, I agree and second @ukmo-kitstokes comment in #19:
It would be nice to have a consistent abbreviation for water levels, currents, ice concentration, bottom depth that can be used throughout the code base and enforced in new code. For example, it could be that they use a three letter abbreviation such as wat, cur, ice, bot and that a fourth uppercase letter could be added for a specific flavour of each variable, such as watL, curU, iceC, botD. I feel this would be better than cryptic abbreviations such as bd which could mean a number of things.