This schema serves as a common Warrant Reference Schema representing the common set of extensions that will support each type of warrant exchange. For verification purposes, there will be 3 constraint schemas forcing the cardinality of each type of exchange, in addition to 3 different subsets that would also be required. CODES vs. TEXT: When researching this schema, the user community argued strongly for a data configuration that is really questionable in terms of information-representation practice: providing a text description that reiterates information provided in an authoritative code which is also present in the document. (The danger, of course, is that the two items can conflict.) This is grudgingly provided as a convenience to persons sight-reading the documents. However: the textual descriptions have no other significance or purpose. If, in an instance document, the text is ever found to be in conflict with the corresponding (non-empty) code element, the text element MUST either be removed, or its content edited so as to agree with the value of the code element. The textual element should NEVER be accessed by any data search or manipulation process, except one intended to identify, and possibly correct, any such code/description discrepancies. A common container that supports each of the following document types listed above. A container for all information about a court's initial issuance of a warrant. Extension to Subject to support association with a vehicle Extenssion to warrant to include Wisconsin specific extensions. Court Order Designated Subject Service Information. This container specifies the person who is alleged to have committed an act against society, property, person or other laws. This person is identified in the Circuit Court as a defendant