>
> <Quote>
> leading with the RIM approach to cover off as much as we can
> there, and
> supplementing that with limited XML-serialization as needed,
> and particularly to mitigate changes to the RIM itself.
> </Quote>
>
> Would that mean (sorry for the multiple choice here):
>
> (a) Mapping to current RIM architecture as much as possible, and
> covering "unmappable" items with Slots, OR
>
> (b) Mapping to current RIM architecture as much as possible
> and covering
> "unmappable" items with limited XML-serialization (and not Slots), OR
>
> (c) Something else?
>
My first choice would be (c) - identifying what needed to be added to the RIM to make all requirements mappable, but can live with (a). In keeping with previous discussions, I would prefer we completely avoid (b).
Mark
