Ira, I am not sure I agree with this proposal. It was the result of experimenting the use of the messaging framework with a tool that doesn't support type substitution at all. Personally I think we shouldn't stop using this mechanism (type substitution) just because a tool like InfoPath doesn't support it. It's my opinion. I agree that type substitution adds complexity to the schema and to implementations but we know that the content model may vary depending on the status of the message and type substitution facilitates that. In your proposal the content model is always the same even though you are changing the message status. Regards, -Marc _____ From: Ira Fuchs [mailto:ifuchs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tue 3/15/2005 10:52 AM To: mwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: FpML-MWG40 FpML Messaging Framework Proposal and response to Matthew Rawling's proposed extensions To All Concerned, I am attaching a messaging framework proposal based on a collaboration with Marc Gratacos. Matthew Rawling's recent proposal to extend the messaging framework with a number of artifacts (Message ID, Reversal and Restatement, Conversations, Receipts and Sources) provided useful context in which to present this proposal and discuss its applicability and ramifications. Attached is a Word document containing the proposal followed by comments on Matthew's suggested extensions. Ira Fuchs XML Associates Inc. Phone: 718-268-0592 email: <mailto:ifuchs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ifuchs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>