FpML Issues Tracker

Summary

There are many clauses in ln-21 should they be used freely or bound? Should the clauses be split into separate rules?

-----Original Message----- From: valwg@fpml.org [mailto:valwg@fpml.org] On Behalf Of Christian Nentwich Sent: 24 March 2009 15:39 To: valwg@fpml.org; Andrew P Parry Subject: FpML-VAL More feedback on validation rules

All,

I am posting this here again because this group will be much more aware of what has previously been flagged as an issue. Either way, I hope you find it useful as an additional check-point: ... ... **

Rule ln-21 (and potentially others, but only spotted it here): The XPath description makes statements like "exists(interestAccrualSchedule/interestRatePeriod/interestDayBasis)" whereas the English states "interestAccrualSchedule/interestRatePeriod/interestDayBasis must exist". Interpreting the rule freely, it is likely that the English version means "an interestDayBasis must exist in EVERY rate period" - but that is not what the XPath expresses.

MDR response (abbreviated) -

There were many problems with Loans. In the end we agreed to suspend work on Loans Validation until the schema settled. I can see the problem you have identified. When you use the term "freely", I presume you mean that in the mathematical sense of an unbound variable rather than the vernacular sense of willy-nilly? Whether I interpret the rule bound or freely it still makes no business sense to me. Why would all these clauses be combined into ln-21 if we were to interpret them freely? The clauses should be split up to provide the maximally free expression under a single valid context.