FpML Issues Tracker
closed
Minor
Always
Validation Rules
Admin
None
Summary
Rules shared-13 and shared-14 having the following issues related to compliance with the specification on writing rules:
1. They use the phrase "anywhere in the document". The term "document" needs defining as to whether it is an element, document-node, etc.. Also all of these definitions are outside the current context. The term "anywhere" should be expressed as a regular XPath axis as "//". 2. The context is defined as "FpML" when it should be "Document (complex type)".
The solution is: " shared-13 (Mandatory) Context: Document (complex type) Rule: //sellerPartyReference/@href = (trade/tradeSide, party)/@id
shared-14 (Mandatory) Context: Document (complex type) Rule: //calculationAgentPartyReference/@href = party/@id "
Notes:
matthewdr
06/12/08 2:29 pm
The semantics of the “=” operator are not defined in FpML Validation Rules. In the example of shard-13 and shared-14 they are operating on sets. In XPath “=” on two sets returns true if any element in either is equivalent to any element in the other. Rather than define “=” semantics in FpML I propose we adopt the XPath definition. In which case the rules would need to be modified:
”
shared-13 (Mandatory)
Context: Document (complex type)
Rule: every $sellerPartyReference in //sellerPartyReference satisfies $sellerPartyReference/@href = (trade/tradeSide, party)/@id
shared-14 (Mandatory)
Context: Document (complex type)
Rule: every $calculationAgentPartyReference in //calculationAgentPartyReference satisfies $calculationAgentPartyReference /@href = party/@id
”
matthewdr
08/26/08 1:34 pm
Agreed at the VWG today to implement as proposed.
lyteck
08/26/08 2:59 pm
implemented as agreed
matthewdr
08/26/08 4:07 pm
Closed after testing.