Hello, Alan and Sasha,

Thank you for the careful reading. Sorry for a few obvious errors (I only spell-checked the second but last version...)

To keep the ball rolling, and you busy, I have immediately incorporated almost all Alan's suggestion into the text, and only  have a few comments - see below. The result is at  http://www-f9.ijs.si/~krizan/tmp/paper.ps.gz.

While we are waiting eagerly for Alan's comments to the rest of the paper, we are working on Sasha's list. If Alan manages to send us the comments today US time, we might be able to produce a full update tomorrow.

I am also setting up a directory with all comments and replies.

Alan Schwartz wrote:

>     "2 m of radiation path"  why not quote the number of
>                 radiation lengths?
>
>  
>
In a RICH counter the real length times (sine (Cherenkov angle))**2 matters and not rad. length.

>     mu=0.17 does not correspond to 10% of events containing     \geq 1 interaction
>
>  
>
Sasha had a similar comment: this statement refers to the triggered events. I have added 'of triggered events' in the text.

>     "L_K" "L_e" "L_mu" "L_pi"  seem undefined (?)
>  
>
Will be defined in the next iteration.

>     3rd bullet: is "impact parameter" defined?         add "with respect" after "D meson candidate"
>
>     
>  
>
I think this is a pretty standard expression. It should be clear from the context to what kind of impact parameter it refers to.

>     "signal significance" is this defined?
>  
>
Was defined five lines later, I moved it up.

>
> p7, par 2: "figure 2, figure 3, figure 4" -> "Figs. 2-4"
>
>  
>
This is dictated by the style file. There is a command for referring to a figure (\fref{})... I do not know whether there is a way around it.

>  
>     The 4.2 accounts for different branching fractions,
>     acceptances, and reconstruction efficiencies, yes?
>  
>
Yes.

>  par 3: "table 6, table 7, table 8" -> "Tables 6-8"
>  
>
Same comment as above - dictated by the style.

Missing: error in trigger efficiency.

Bye
Peter