Dale, I like this proposal. But, how can the schema be a normative part of the spec yet change without a new version of the spec? You seem to be arguing against the schema taking precedence yet you then say it should? If the schema is non-normative, or normative in a separate document, then such fixes should be easy. I guess I don't understand. I looks to me like your argument is somehow both ways? My comment about caching locally was exactly to allow fixes. Maybe I misunderstood, but it seemed Doug was arguing for a central schema which took precedence over everything. My main argument against the schema taking precedence is that we have not been focusing on the schema in our discussions -- it has been somewhat of a side issue without change tracking or control. In fact, Chris' statement about the schema becoming normative with the adoption of SOAP is incorrect. In v1.0 after SOAP became an integral part of TRP, the schema is specifically an EXAMPLE and examples are non-normative (v1.0 section 4.4). In v1.0, we made a point of making sure the specification took precedence over the schema. Regards, David.