Dear Peter,

the paper is nicely written and the results are very interesting
A few comments:

1.for the reader it would be helpful if b and d are difined in the
caption of table 2

--> done

2. as far as I understand the systematic error due to the assumption
of exponent 1 in the A dependence was not considered. Why?

--> All previous experiments have assumed alpha=1, which makes it hard to
--> compare with them, if we do it differently. Note thet there is only one 
--> measurement of alpha available, not very precise, which would cause
--> a large systematic error, and would again make the result hard to
--> compare to other measurement. On the other hand, we state clearly
--> that we assume alpha=1, and it is straightforward to derive the result
--> for any alpha from the data given in the paper.

3. You assume factorization in x(Feynman) and pt which usually in
hadronics does not hold (seagull effect) see e.g Z Phys C69(1995)55
This may explain the problem you discuss following formula (10).
Michael Schmelling should know all details.

--> We simply lack statistics (and the previous experiments suffered
--> even more) to do anything more elaborate. By using the same 
--> parametrisation our results can also be compared to the others. 

4. in ref PL 135B(1984)510 it was shown, that the s/u ratio in hard
processes is larger than in soft hadronic interactions. UA1 observed ~1986
a similar effect in one of their mixing papers. So perhaps your
observation is not unnatural

--> Thanks for pointing this out. Do you think we should make a point out
--> of it and add the reference? 


Necessary corrections in the references:
1. [3]Erratum -ibid B335(1990)260 missing
2. [14] misprint: 2007 Eur. J. Phys. C49(2006)545
3.[15] only K Ehret is author
4. [17] only W Gradl is author
5.should read [19] NIM A 576(2007)312
6.[23] should read R. Battiston et al ...
7.[24] I. Abt is first author of the Lumi paper -> should read
I. Abt et al arXiv...

--> done
--> Same remark as for Wolfgang: There was a mess with the references because 
--> we have neen using a wrong style file along with the wrong example, and 
--> remnants of the old style remained on several places. 



Hope that the nice paper is published soon
Regards
Deitrich

--> Thanks. We hope that we shall soon converge.