A question on terminology: CCPP-Framework, CCPP-Physics

[climbfuji]

We use CCPP-Framework and CCPP-Physics in the technical documentation for the two components, and refer to them as [the] CCPP-Framework is ... and [the] CCPP-Physics is ....

While this is all good for the framework, it seems weird for the physics, because "physics" is plural? Shouldn't we use "CCPP-Physics are ..."? It would be different if it was called "the CCPP-Physics library" but we are not using this terminology (I would prefer that).

[ligiabernardet]

In my view, it is fine to use "physics" as singular. A quick Google search corroborates that, e.g., *Physics, while plural in derivation, is generally construed as a singular noun except when referring to several “physics” (i.e., two or more different systems ... *(from https://cementanswers.com/is-physics-singular-or-plural/). But on another note, I suggest standardizing as *CCPP** Physics* (and not CCPP-Physics) and *CCPP Framework* (and not CCPP-Framework) as we have been. using in other contexts.

…

On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 5:38 PM Dom Heinzeller ***@***.***> wrote: We use CCPP-Framework and CCPP-Physics in the technical documentation for the two components, and refer to them as [the] CCPP-Framework is ... and [the] CCPP-Physics is .... While this is all good for the framework, it seems weird for the physics, because "physics" is plural? Shouldn't we use "CCPP-Physics are ..."? It would be different if it was called "the CCPP-Physics library" but we are not using this terminology (I would prefer that). — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#52>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE7WQATF32YWZHIQCKEUL7LVDDK63ANCNFSM5SMDEMHQ> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[climbfuji]

Sounds good to me. Yes, I noticed that the tech doc uses CCPP-Framework and CCPP-Physics with dashes in between.