[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

FpML-VAL Val WG discussion - 12th August



All,

 

Due to time pressures I have time only to send a brief list of actions which arose from yesterday’s meeting.  Full minutes will be provided when I return from my vacation on 26th August.

 

1.     Syntax for multiple preconditions.

Agreed to adopt option d) from Lyteck’s e-mailed dated 11th Aug.  NOTE that a subsequent discussion determined that the word “if” could be removed from the suggested notation, therefore, the final agreed version to be used is as follows :-

 

            [firstPaymentDate exists] [lastRegualrPaymentDate exists].

 

ACTION : LL to implement across all appropriate rules  .

 

2.    Terminology

a)    Agreed to us symbolic expressions – e.g. “>=”.

ACTION : LL to implement across all appropriate rules .

 

b)   Agreed to used “iff” function

ACTION : MA or MR to change rule ird-7 as an example to supply to LL.

ACTION : LL to implement across all appropriate rules  and to ensure a “plain English” description of all such functions used is included in the FpML Specification

 

c)    Agreed to adopt “if ..then .. else ...”

ACTION : LL to implement across all appropriate rules .

 

3.    Component Ordering

            There was a degree of confusion regarding the core of this issue. 

ACTION : LL to determine if any changes in rules are required and to report back to the group at the next meeting.

 

4.    Shared Functions

It was agreed that a single of functions (in effect within a single namespace) is the approach to be taken.  This would serve to remove confusion where the same named function has different meanings across rule groups.

ACTION : LL to analyse and implement.  Any discrepancies of same named functions across rule groups are to be brought to the next meeting.

 

 

Next Meeting – Tuesday 26th August – 2pm.

 

Yours hurriedly,

 

Pam