Response Spectrum App: Potential improvements

Low priority. The following from Emel Seyhan (RMS):

• I agree and like your idea about splitting [subduction and crustal specific apps given difference in parameterizations] in the beginning which may give end-users more flexibility and could increase accuracy of tool usage.
• Another thought is to add a short manual on input variables. As you also indicated, a not so knowledgeable user can easily skip ztor in subduction models and start their Rrup from an unapplicable value. I think these enhancements would mostly help with subduction interface and inslab models.
• Also, ztor is widely used in crustal models, but some of Norm/Nico’s models like in NGA-Sub are dependent on ztor. But, rest of subduction models use Zhyp or depth directly. I wonder if you like the idea of separating this conflict for the users. I know this is probably too much customization: If a GMPE is using ztor, ztor cell is available to change by the user. But, if a GMPE is using Zhyp and not ztor, that cell is grayed out or you add Zhyp as well by graying out ztor. OR (I know…) you could have a more generic input parameter like hypocentral depth or so that is applicable for any subduction model?
• I sometimes wonder if ztor (or zhyp) and rupture distance should be connected to each other to avoid user errors. Would you like adding error flags when user unintentionally enters an unintuitive entry? If it’s too much, just ignore my rambling. 😃