[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
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:
- eqd-23 ("every option has effective date after trade date") seems to
be made redundant by eqd-31 ("anything deriving from
EquityDerivativeBase has effective date after start date")
- eqd-30 seems to be made redundant by eqd-32, for the same reason
- The XPath in eqd-31 and eqd-32 is missing equityEffectiveDate after
$equityDerivativeBase, in the > comparison of the path
**
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.
I expressed the rule as follows in NRL (note the "in each", instead of
"in at least one") and would appreciate your feedback:
Context: InterestPaymentNotice
Rule "ln-21"
In each interestAccrualSchedule.interestRatePeriod the following are
present: interestRate, allInRate, indexTenor and in each
interestAccrualSchedule.interestRatePeriod the following are present:
margin, interestDayBasis
**
Rule cd-37: it doesn't make a lot of sense to define quotationAmount and
minimumQuotationAmount as "conditions" just for one rule. These are just
simple existence checks, the conditions should probably be removed (or
you will be swamped, if you adopt this approach across the board).
**
Rule ird-12. A word is missing in the description: "the frequency
specified in calculationPeriodFrequency must divide the __calculation
period___ precisely". This rule is insufficiently formalised. It does
not point to, or define, what the "start date" or "end date" of the
period is. You could probably do that by pointing to the definitions at
the top.
Alternatively, it is possible to formalise this rule by breaking into
four different stub scenarios, for example in NRL (which you can strip
of syntax and use as English if you wish):
If no firstRegularPeriodStartDate is present and no
lastRegularPeriodEndDate is present then
the [frequency defined by] the effectiveDate.unadjustedDate and the
terminationDate.unadjustedDate
[is an integer multiple of] the calculationPeriodFrequency
Similar rules applies for the other stub scenarios, with the respective
stub dates substituted.
regards,
Christian
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe valwg youremail@address
To view archives: http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_valwgmail/threads.html