Extensions on the registry

[Ray Plante]

(thanks, Kevin, for branching another thread.  It's really critical for 
working through these issues to be able to separate them when ever 
possible.  divide and conquer!)

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, KevinBenson wrote:
> Does everybody agree that we should be able to on Full Registries store all
> Resources including extension Resources?

My current take, personally, is that Full registries *should* store all 
records, even though they contain extensions; however, I'm not sure I 
would go as far as "must", since this has potentially substantial 
implementation issues.  The next question is, what does this do to the 
meaning of "Full"?  If a registry does not include extensions, is it 
allowed to declare itself full, or can we live with a fuzzier definition?  

> Would it be okay if certain Full Registries would not be able to query on
> them and possibly never query on them (them being the extension part of the
> schema's)?  

Yes.