Re: FpML-VAL FW: New Validation Rule Set for FX

[Christian Nentwich <christian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew,

quick comment before I review this properly: any rule that mandates 
values as non-negative should be enforced in the schema, unless you can 
see reasons why they are not?

regards,

Christian

Andrew Jacobs wrote:
> 2nd try.
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Andrew Jacobs [mailto:andrew.jacobs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* 03 January 2008 12:08
> *To:* 'vwg@xxxxxxxx'
> *Cc:* 'Karel Engelen'; 'Ned Micelli'; 
> 'rick.schumacher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> *Subject:* New Validation Rule Set for FX
>
> Please find attached a proposal for 41 new validation rules for the 
> current FX product set.
>
> Thanks
>  
> Andrew Jacobs
> Director & CTO
> HandCoded Software Ltd
> Mob: +44 (0)7710 304239
>  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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