I'm a little confused about "Affirmation". I always thought that
affirmation was part of a confirmation process, working at the
contract
level. If it's at that trade level, it seems to me that we need to
distinguish between a mere notification and a request for affirmation.
So I would suggest the following, based in large part on Andrew's doc:
If we wish to notify another stakeholder of the execution of the
trade, we
used the following set of notification messages:
- tradeExecutionNotification
- tradeExecutionNotificationCorrected
- tradeExecutionNotificationCancelled
(These names are long and ugly, but I guess everybody can
understand what
they mean and not get their knickers in a twist.)
If we wish another party to agree that a trade was executed, we use
the
following set of request messages:
- tradeAffirmationRequest(ed)
- tradeAffirmationRequestCorrected
- tradeAffirmationRequestCancelled
To respond to these, the recipient would use one of the following
messages
- tradeAffirmed
- tradeAffirmationDisputed (with content indicating the reason/
location of
dispute)
Once an affirmation has been completed, either party could send a
notification of the affirmation (not of the execution, mind, but
rather of
the affirmation)) using the following messages.
- tradeAffirmationNotification
- tradeAffirmationNotificationCorrected
- tradeAffirmationNotificationCancelled
(I'm not sure how the last two messages would be generated in
practice, but
I'm pessimistic enough to assume that they would be required.)
Does this work?
- Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: bpwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:bpwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andrew Jacobs
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 5:39 PM
To: coord@xxxxxxxx; awg@xxxxxxxx; bpwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: FpML-BP Re: [fpml-coord] RE: FpML-AWG Trade Execution
messages
I like the use of 'corrected' rather than 'modified' but I
think for consistency the initial message should have the
same prefix as the corrected and retracted ones.
We also need to differentiate between messages exchanged
between participants in the negotiation of a trade
operation and those subsequently sent to non-participants
who have an interest in the outcome. I've attached a
section from the updated messaging architecture document I
was working on for affirmation as an example.
In the current processed many of the final messages in the
final confirmation phase of the negotiation are
notifications rather than responses so that they can be
distributed to others. I think this is wrong and they
should just be reponses and a different message type used
for the notification. This change makes the role of the
receiver clearer it also means that the notifications
could contain additional information, like the 'on behalf'
of indicator.
Andrew
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:31:01 -0400 "Brian Lynn"
<brian.lynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It might be better if we used more explicit words than
"Modified" and
"Cancelled" ... taking part of Andrew's suggestion, how
about the
following?
TradeExecuted
TradeExecutionCorrected
TradeExecutionRetracted
(TradeExecutedCorrected or TradeExecutedModified seems
very unwieldy to me.)
- Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: awg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:awg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Anthony B. Coates
(Miley Watts)
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:15 PM
To: awg@xxxxxxxx; coord@xxxxxxxx; bpwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: FpML-AWG Trade Execution messages
I agree with Matthew that the scope implied by the names
seemed rather
larger than the actual scope of the messages, and that
can make things
misleading.
Cheers, Tony.
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 22:01:36 +0100, Brian Lynn
<brian.lynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Matthew -
I'd considered the names you suggested, they just seemed
really unwieldy
to
me. But perhaps they are better.
On the consistency with the contract messages, these are
intended
specifically for reporting block trade executions, so
this is a different
problem.
_____
From: awg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:awg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Matthew Rawlings
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 4:10 PM
To: awg@xxxxxxxx; coord@xxxxxxxx; bpwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-AWG Trade Execution messages
Feedback:
This needs doing, and thanks for making a proposal.
"TradeModified" - the problem with the name of the
message is that you
are
not modifying the trade; you are modifying the report of
the trade. Why
not
call it "TradeExecutedModified"? The problem I have seen
is people using
modifications of the report to modify the trade
(economic amendments), in
error.
"TradeCancelled" - this has the same problem that it
does not cancel a
trade, but cancels the notification of the trade. Why
not call it
"TradeExecutedCancelled"? The problem I have seen is
people using
cancels of
notification to represent cancels (unwinds,
counter-bookings), in error.
How does the TradeExecuted message differ from
TradeAffirmed or
ConfirmQuoteAccepted? All three provide notification of
an execution. Why
not just have one message to notify of execution?
Why do these have two parties rather than two trade
sides? Presumably
this
is because this will need to wait until FpML 5.0?
To what extent is this process consistent with the
Contract messages?
Most
usage of Trade A2A I have seen has been really messaging
of Contracts
(resultant from allocations).
Matthew Rawlings
+44 791 539 7824
_____
From: awg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:awg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Brian Lynn
Sent: 09 July 2007 19:04
To: coord@xxxxxxxx; bpwg@xxxxxxxx; awg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: FpML-AWG Trade Execution messages
At today's coordination committee meeting I promised to
write up the
proposal to add trade execution messages in more detail.
I've attached a write-up with diagrams, and a
preliminary schema.
Note that this write up doesn't contain anything on
enhancements to the
pre-trade process; I'm working on another short document
to discuss the
options in that area.
Regards,
Brian Lynn
--
Anthony B. Coates
Senior Partner
Miley Watts LLP
Experts In Data
UK: +44 (20) 8816 7700, US: +1 (239) 344 7700
Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026
Data standards participant: genericode, ISO 20022 (ISO
15022 XML),
UN/CEFACT, MDDL, FpML, UBL.
http://www.mileywatts.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
---
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank
subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe awg
youremail@address
To view archives:
http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_awgmail/threads.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
---
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank
subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe coord
youremail@address
To view archives:
http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_coordmail/threads.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe bpwg youremail@address
To view archives: http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_bpwgmail/threads.html