> I have had to re-edit the schema somewhat to conform to the
> coding style previously agreed.
Presumably before I got involved?
> Is the recursive inclusion in Substatus code type
> intentional?? I have assumed not since if it were intentional
> I would have expected notice to be drawn to it.
The schema you used would correspond roughly to the SOAP proposal that
uses an array of codes, with attributes used for the status values. I
proposed some variant of this at one point.
This is why I felt we needed some discussion, so that there would be
consensus on the approach chosen from an XML standpoint, but I guess I
didn't call that out well enough.
-- Scott
