[Rivet] normalisation to cross-sections

[Hendrik Hoeth]

Thus spake Hendrik Hoeth (hendrik.hoeth at cern.ch):

> In fact, that's why I hadn't commented on this discussion so far --
> too much painful brain activity needed.

Okay, I've started reading the looooong mails in the normalisation
thread, and I'm beginning to get an idea of why you want to normalise
each and every distribution using the cross-section. Still I'm not sure
if that's the right way to go. What Rivet writes out after such a
"normalisation" of an event shape variable is not directly comparable
with the data anymore. And I fear that we break Rivet for many users.
How do we explain to someone that he suddenly needs to provide
cross-section information for observables that are clearly normalised to
unity in the data?

More to be written in the other thread ...

     Hendrik

-- 
"You have to take the most direct road to go instead of your
 meeting, you have to, this one ended, leave at once the CERN
 domain."         (imprint on the CERN visitor ID cards)