> ... What happens > when the revisions aren't linear? (Or do we require them to be?)
I was not considering readers and writers being completely different software. My use case was two versions of a single application writing and reading its objects. Non linear revisions for persistence aren't common within a single application. > I'm worried that the semantics of reader and writer schemas are already > complicated enough; adding in sets of schemas makes it even trickier. I understand your concern. I agree the union schema could become really complicated over time, say after 5 revisions. We'll have to carry all the five revisions even if know that nobody needs all the fiver revisions at any given time. Given this, let me work with the "external" schema-id idea and gain some experience and then come back with a proposal. For now, let me withdraw my proposal. Thank you and Doug for the valuable feedback. Thiru
