This yields little advantage as no extra semantics have been added. Gregory commented that there is a lot to be gained from looking at existing EDI frameworks and standards. EDI applications have been in use for nearly 10 years, so the analysis to define data types has been well-tested in the field. Existing type definitions can be used as a starting point when developing your schemas. The key issue is to get the data types clearly defined and agreed with trading partners.
Structural differences are less important, as they can be removed by transformations.
Data types should be defined with extension and refinement in mind. The schema itself should be designed from the perspective of the business process, and not a particular application. This gives a greater degree of flexibility and better future-proofing as it makes no assumptions about either who or what will be processing the messages. As use of XML schemas grows, the potential for reuse expands. BizTalk provides a great repository of schemas, and RosettaNet is an excellent source of information on process and data set analysis.