Hi Kerstin,

> in that case we should for the AWG page to be updated and than update VVF
> accordingly I guess... otherwise we will just produce a lot of 3d
> weights and not really use them anyway.

You're right, that would probably be the best solution ...

I would propose using the values from the winter 06 HFAG page
(averages if available, otherwise best measurements):

pilnu     -> HFAG average
rholnu    -> BABAR Phys .Rev. D72, 051102 (2005)
omega     -> Belle Phys. Rev. Lett. 93:131803 (2004)
eta       -> CLEO Phys. Rev. D 68, 072003 (2003)
eta'      -> = eta (but 100% error)
a,b,f,... -> 0
non res -> incl. - excl.

Does anybody have a different opinion?