General comments ----------------- We thank the authors for this article on CCD developments for the ILC. The article needs quite a lot of work to be brought up to the standard required for published proceedings. First a few general comments on some main concerns. The article needs some work on the structure. The introduction has to introduce the work that will be presented. If I understand correctly, there are three areas covered: simulation of the layout, prototype testsing and tracking S/W development. Say this in the introduciton. Also, you have to describe the two (?) options that are compared in the layout simulations, either in the introduction or at the start of the simulation seciton. Also decide what information that should be put in which section and in which oder. The pixel size of 5 um is mentioned multiple times, but many acronyms or concepts are not described at all. There are many errors in the language of the article and many sentences don't read well. Sometimes it is difficult to understand what you are trying to say. I have pointed out quite a few of the problems below, but please ask an English speaking collague to proof-read it before resubmitting. Some of the sentences are also a bit too informal in style for a publication. There are a lot of issues with the figures. See specific comments below, please change to a non-compressed format and make sure the text is readable. There is also a bit of context missing for some of the results and statements and some jargon is used in parts. Make sure you introduce all concepts and acronyms before you use them. Again, please ask a colleague to proof-read it before resubmitting to address these issues. Line-by-line comments ---------------------- Introduction line 1: The use of the word 'physics' is a bit non-specific. Please re-phrase in a more specific way. line 9: pixel -> pixel array line 9: This reads as the IP resolution is 1.4 um, is that really the case? Perhaps it is the hit resolution that is 1.4 um? Please rephrase and clarify. line 10: intertrain -> inter-train Section 2 Fourth bullet: % -> percent Figure 1: The figure is too small and should be centered on the page. As a guidline, the text size of the legend and axis labels in the figure should be the same size as the text size in the caption. Also, the x-axis title is overlapping the numbers on the axis. Figure 1 caption: The CMOS option is not introduced yet in the article. Please present the different design options in the introduciton. Figure 2: The figure should be centered on the page. Also, the figure has poor resolution in the text. Please use a non-compressed image format (vectorised) such as PDF or PS for the figures. Figure 3: Should also be centered. The resolution is better compared to Figure 2, but if you could change to a non-compressed format it would be better. Figure 2 and 3 captions: Extend a bit to describe what the reader is seeing. What is what in the figure? Point 3 at the bottom of page 3: The sentence doesn't make sense. Either the 'inter' is redundant or you have to rephrase completely. Figure 4: Center the figure on page. Figure 4 caption: Capitalise the sentence and add a full stop. Also, extend caption to be a bit more descriptive. You have to describe what the blocks do or at least define the acronyms. Page 4, line 10: Please specify what the beam induced background is. Is it x-rays from the beam self-focussing? Page 4, line 11: First sentence is too informal in style. Page 4, line 14: Costly effective -> cost efficiency. Page 4, line 18-19: Space before the parenteses. Page 4, line 21-22: It is not clear what you are trying to say, what do you mean by standard and charged pixels? Page 4, line 22: The frequency -> The required frequency Figure 5: Center the picture on the page. Figure 6: Center the figure on the page. Again, it is way to small, the labels and legend isn't readable. Also, remove the milk-coloured ROOT background and make it proper white. This is presumably also a compressed format, change to PDF. Remove the non-informative title saying 'signal'. Do you really need to display all the fit parameters. If so you have to say in the caption what you have fitted. Figure 6 caption: Extend it to make it more descriptive. Page 5, line 4-5: The sentence doesn't read well and it is not clear what you mean. Page 5, line 5: foccus -> focussed Page 5, line 8: Just giving the location of the signal peak doesn't really say anything. Give it some context. Is that as expected? What is the nosise? Is it sufficient for the application you have in mind? Paragraph 'Software R&D' line 2: the word 'until' doesen't make sense here. Just replace it with 'for'? And transverse momentum is written p_{T}, lower case p, upper case T. line 3: What is DBD? Define it. line 4: What is pair backgrounds? This is jargon. Figure 7: Center the figure and change to a non-compressed figure format. Section 4, last sentence: are -> is.