The three reviews offer detailed points that require consideration, with appropriate clarifications in a revised manuscript.
The authors' responses appear well thought out and convincing, and a revised manuscript reflecting the additional information and clarifications can fully address the reviews. Please proceed with a thorough revision.

One of the referees requested the opportunity to review the revised manuscript. I am honoring this request.

The authors have carefully considered all comments and suggestions, and revised the manuscript accordingly. I believe the revision has led to an improved manuscript, in terms of presentation and clarity.
My one concern (reflected also by one referee, in a review of the revised manuscript) is that there are an excessive number of references. I understand that the authors want to be comprehensive in their literature review, but 160 references for a paper that is not a review paper are excessive. For example, recognizing the seminal work of J.Y. Parlange does not need to cite (page 4, line 23) 11 papers! Use "e.g." and choose 2-4 representative papers. The same is true elsewhere....please reconsider and try to reduce significantly the number of references.