**Comments on Quantitative interpretation=A05-m5bii:**

- The theoretical differential cross sections can be seen as `theoretical results'. As such, they are be copied to the
*Results* module. They could also be provided with an extra label in some other way, that permits interested reader to locate them.
- We consider the theoretical differential cross section as an `interpretation' of the experimental one, and the comparison of the theoretical to the experimental cross sections as part of the discusson on the reliability of the interpretation. As such the description of the interpretation itself (i.e. the theoretical results of the calculation of the cross section) and the argumentation on its reliability are part of the same module according to the modular model.
- This justifies the assumption used in the
*Interpretation* A05-m5ai; only in a very narrow region at
the ionization probability rapidly goes to zero
- In the module
*Quantitative interpretation* the authors try to give a quantitative explanation of the experimental results, but conclude that this is not possible in the current work: in A05-m5bii it is stated that there is poor quantitative agreement.
- The theoretical differential cross section, which is to be compared to the experimental cross section in order to see if they agree, depends on the classical deflection function, which in its turn depends on the potential of the system. Thus the calculation of the cross section takes place in three steps. However, these steps cannot be taken in a linear manner: everything is determined ``iteratively''
*via* fitting. This means that the steps, and the two constituent modules of the *Quantitative interpretation* are not at all clear cut.