re: Now some feedback on Header v0-63

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by Joe Lapp
>
3)      Section 3.5 "From and To" defines a ‘context’ attribute.  This
attribute
has the same purpose as the W3C XML Schema xsi:type attribute.  I’m
wondering whether we should be using this soon-to-be-standard way of
specifying content type instead of inventing our own.  There is no doubt
within the W3C XML Schema WG about whether xsi:type will make it into the
XML Schema standard, so I think it’s safe to use.  BizTalk uses xsi:type
for exactly this purpose, even allowing xsi:type in its header entries.
The one drawback is that the value of xsi:type is a URI, which is
considerably less readable than the keywords ebXML might specify.  On the
other hand, it is considerably more extensible, since it doesn’t require
ebXML to serve as a clearinghouse for all potential type names.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<

The qic:base mechanism and qic mechanism in GUIDE takes advantage
of the latest W3C work on datatyping in MSL while at the same time
synergizing
with the ebXML RegRep work.  This would certainly provide a better
mechanism as the W3C has already identified the issues and sought
to move beyond xsi:type for some of the reasons you note regarding 
the use of URI.

http://www.bizcodes.org/GUIDE/  for a discussion of the qic:base mechanism.

Thanks, DW.