From: clidman (clidman@eso.org)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 16:46:23 PDT
Hi Rob,
All my comments are relatively minor and should be quick to fix, so I have not
listed them in terms of priority. Here they are in order from the first page to the last.
Cheers, Chris.
* Section 1, 4th paragraph:
The last two sentences should be joined.
"....is so much greater ... observations that these 11 supernovae themselves ..."
OR
remove the "so".
* Section 2.1. 2nd paragraph
Remove the "at" in "Spectra were take at with ...."
Change "WFOSC2" to "EFOSC2"
Change "Sne Ib/c" to "SNe Ib/c"
We do not have SiII 6150 for 1998ba and 2000fr either, which means that
we do not have SiII 6150 for 7/11 HST SNe. It would be better to say ...
"All eleven supernovae in the set have strong confirmation as type Ia through
the presence of SiII 6150, SiII 4190 or FeII features that match those of a
type Ia observed at a similar epoch."
* Section 2.2, last sentence.
?? "... and shows plots ..."
Perhaps you had meant to say " ... tabulates all of the lightcurve data and
Figures 11 and 12 plots all the light curves for the SNe used in this paper."
* Section 2.3, first sentence.
icolor -> color
* Section 2.4, first paragraph
... are outliers ... -> ... as outliers ...
* Section 3, 2nd last paragraph.
"... both that ..." -> " ... that ..."
* Section 5, 2nd paragraph
"identfied" -> "identified"
* Section 5.2, 2nd paragraph
Is the following correct? 0.0 is not much of a change.
"... the maximum liklyhood value of w gets larger by 0.0 ..."
* Section 5.8, 2nd last paragraph.
"... supernova evolution ..." -> " ... progenitor evolution ..."
* Figure 10. There are no dashed lines in this plot as stated in the
figure caption.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 15:47:01 PDT