Dear colleagues, I would like to post this reaction Wednesday afternoon. Tjeerd

Dear Alvaro and authors of the CONF-2012-028 note.

We are happy to see so many of our suggestions accepted in your new version.

We do understand your wish to stay consistent among your different conference contributions. We hope that for your paper you will consider alternatives for A^RAW_CP and "inclusive CP asymmetry".

As a side remark: Your proposed "^ACC A^RAW_CP" in v2 will need more explanation about what "corrected by the acceptance" means.

In your answer about the motivation for this study you state that "there is no theoretical prediction for the total CP violation for these three-body decays, nor for local enhancements of the charge asymmetry in the Dalitz plot". This may seem obvious for you, but this is an important statement that would inform the reader in the introduction.

There is a little misunderstanding about line 71: Given cos(theta) > 0.999998, sin(theta) < 0.002. We propose to quota this limit for sin(theta) which is also useful for the expression for theta_pointing.

Also in the color plots the edges of several bins are invisible. In fact these were two separate remarks about visibility.

We do not agree that adding useful information to a figure should pollute them.

Best regards, Tjeerd for Nikhef