GREAT-ER Class Concept
frank.koormann at intevation.de
Tue Aug 24 15:55:13 CEST 2004
thank you very much for your comments!
* Frederik Verdonck <frederik.verdonck at euras.be> [040824 08:49]:
> Not sure if I understand your question correctly but letting the user
> decide between "class parameters" and "environmental parameters" may not
> be straightforward as the user will probably not know what you mean with
> "class parameters" and "environmental parameters". You may want to use
> more TGD-wording as "site-specific" and "generic" or "local" and
> "regional" parameters.
Applying more common names for the different concepts is a good point.
However, we will have to select this carefully: The class concept is
positioned somewhere between "site-specific" and "generic". You classify
river (stretches) like brook, mountain stream or large river.
N.B.: The flow, flow velocity, length etc is never class based but
> I would even argue it may be helpful to encourage/guide the user to use
> distinct parameter sets (if sensitive to PEC) for different types of
> stretches in a catchment (if allowed by data availability) because what
> is the added-value of using a GIS-system if no georeferenced data are
Checking the classes currently stored in GREAT-ER show that there only
a default river and a default lake class are defined which don't
differ much. My experience from preparing new catchments is that
the required data is rarely available for specific stretches.
Maybe a task for a master thesis to define more different classes :)
> Just some thoughts, hope this helps,
Yes, thanks again. I will think about naming.
Frank Koormann <frank.koormann at intevation.de>
Professional Service around Free Software (http://intevation.net/)
FreeGIS Project (http://freegis.org/)
More information about the Great-er-list