updated schemas and sample cpp/cpa instance documents posted

[christopher ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>]

All,

I have posted the revised (as per our discussions on this weeks
call) versions of the XSD, DTD and sample instance CPP and CPAs
to our teams web page.

The relevant URLs are as follows:

	http://ebxml.org/project_teams/tradePartner/cpp-cpa-094.xsd
	http://ebxml.org/project_teams/tradePartner/cpp-cpa-094.dtd

	http://ebxml.org/project_teams/tradePartner/cpp-example.xml
	http://ebxml.org/project_teams/tradePartner/cpa-example.xml
	http://ebxml.org/project_teams/tradePartner/cpa-example-dtd.xml

Note that I have had to make two revisions that I don't believe
we have previously captured. One for certain.

The XML ID attribute name on the CollaborationProtocolAgreement
element is named 'cpaid' so as not to confuse it with an XML ID
type (which is typically named id). This was necessary because
of the use of a global ID attribute that is of type XML ID which 
conflicts with the type of the now named cpaid attribute which 
is CDATA so that any valid string may be used as a CPAId value.

The second change is the name of the former schemaLocation
attribute of the NamespaceSupported element. I have changed this 
attribute's name to 'location' because XMLSpy wanted to use it
as an xsi:schemaLocation (probably incorrectly) and insisted that
I specify a value that is consistent with the usage of the
xsi:schemaLocation attribute even though our schemaLocation
attribute was properly namespace qualified.

In any event, the schemas and sample documents all parse (what a concept;-)
and validate with the exception that XMLAuthority incorrectly (IMO)
reports that the xmlns attributes are undeclared (if I understand 
correctly, the 'xmlns' "attribute" is in truth a psuedo attribute
and need not be declared in the DTD.

I would appreciate it if others would take a stab at validating
these with the tools you use so that we have confirmation that
the schemas and sample documents are indeed valid.

Cheers,

Chris