From mverzocc@fnal.gov Fri Apr 30 16:52:09 2004
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 18:07:30 -0500
From: Marco Verzocchi <mverzocc@fnal.gov>
To: Gordon Watts <gwatts@phys.washington.edu>, d0dfwg@fnal.gov,
     Terry Wyatt <twyatt@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Comments from the WZ group on data format issues

    [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
    [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set.  ]
    [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]

Hi Gordon
   yes I consider running inside d0correct acceptable and I agree that
for things like b-tagging that is probably always going to happen. But
as time goes by I think it would be nice to move version -1 to D0reco.
And we should be already doing that, particularly for vertexing.
I honestly don't understand why there is no effort at all in porting the
current vertexing algorithm to D0reco. And version 0 (by which I mean
the most recent one) should be ported to d0correct. For vertexing I really
have the impression that this is just not happening.

   And quite honestly if this starts happening for things like calorimeter
corrections, I quite frankly believe that the experiment is *****ed.
For electrons this was not the case because Volker was really strong
in taking the approach that everything would go into the framework,
no matter what and that if somebody wanted to support doing the corrections
inside the TMBtree they would have to figure out how and reuse the
code which was written for the framework.

          Marco

PS (And the fact that we don't have version 0 in D0reco would be just
because
       we probably won't figure out a way of calculating the beam spot
before
       running the offline reconstruction)

PS d0dfwg is really an ugly acronym, I mistype it every time...........