FpML Issues Tracker

Summary

In section 4.5 it states: " * Well-formed: The document meets the basic XML well-formedness constraints, all tags are terminated with matching end tags and the character set is valid. * Syntactically valid: The document is valid against the latest FpML schema published by the Architecture Working Group. * Semantically valid: The document is valid against the validation rules published by the Validation Working Group. "

This neither matches W3C definition, standard computer science, nor plain English on these grounds: 1. You can be well formed against XML and also against a schema, and also against constraints. 2. There are no semantics in the VWG's constraints. 3. The FpML Schema requires grammatical validity, not syntactical. 4. The constraints from the VWG are part of the grammar.

I would propose an alternative such as: " * Well-formed XML: The document meets the basic XML well-formedness constraints, all tags are terminated with matching end tags and the character set is valid. * Schema Well-formed: The document is valid against the latest FpML schema published by the Architecture Working Group. * Grammatically valid: The document is valid against the validation rules published by the Validation Working Group. "

Feel free to improve on it.

NB - this isn't a big deal, but then neither is fixing it. It does chew up time for newbies trying to get to grips with FpML. Hence normal priority and low severity.