I'm assuming this is a request for optional conformance units - since a profile does provided enough information for mandatory conformance units

That is correct. Required conformance units can be assumed to be there.

Add a bucket to contain the supported CUs but this CU list is only a subset of all CU declared as "must be declared" in the profile database. The structure should have an indication of full or partial support and if partial what namespaces it is supported in.

The reporter David Levine is willing to assist on this.

Are we sure we have thought this through?

I started to add the update to Part 5 which would include a new Property in ServerCapabilitiesType.
This Property would be an array of a new ConformanceUnit DataType with one entry for every Conformance Unit the server supports.
The ConformanceUnit DataType would be a structure with the following fields
ConformanceUnit Structure
id String ; Id of the conformance unit
nameSpaces[] UInt16 ; If fully support an empty array, else an array of namespace indexes that support this unit

My issue is the ConformanceUnit identifier. I think it should be a unique ID rather than the name of the conformance unit. Currently i don't think there is such a thing.

Either a unique string or a unique numeric ID is fine with me. How are existing CUs identified? I'd recommend using the same identifier

Add a new Property to ServerCapabilitiesType which will be an array of qualified names. The future database will provide the correct qualified names.

Added ConformanceUnits Property to ServerCapabilitiesType.

Agreed to changes in Virtual F2F.