It's not clear to me to whom this Work Item was addressed. Regardless, I think we are all pretty much in agrement on this currently -- after a discussion last week -- although nothing was written down and we hope to expand this field's values in Release 2. So, for now, I'm going to mark this dubiously as "Requires Discussion" for "Release 2 ...," in case more words are desired. - ljr 9/26/13
In light of the 8/29/14 group phone discussion regarding moving from a generic FSM to a per-form implementation, this item seems moot. Given this and the implicity desired expressed during this phone call that Work Items queues be reduced, I'm changing this from "Requires Discussion" (which it has been on for nearly a year) to "Closed." - ljr 9/3/14.