A rule is needed to prevent circular references in relative notionals. An example failure scenario of a notional reference being circular is a notional referring to itself. In general a new rule is needed. The rule would prohibit circular references within notionals. This is expressed with a function because this is the simplest way to … Continued
The rule today is: ” fx-31 (Mandatory) Context: SideRates (complex type) [same-currency-scheme((baseCurrency,currency1SideRate/currency,currency2SideRate/currency))] baseCurrency != the values of both currency1SideRate/currency and currency2SideRate/currency. ” The problem is that precedence operators (parentheses) are missing. 1st possible interpretation is: “(baseCurrency != currency1SideRate/currency) and (baseCurrency != currency2SideRate/currency)” 2nd possible interpretation is: “baseCurrency != (currency1SideRate/currency and currency2SideRate/currency)” Secondly what does “the … Continued
The “numberOfOptions” in the eqd-26 is outside of Context: EquityMultipleExercise Context: EquityMultipleExercise (complex type) eqd-26 (Mandatory) maximumNumberOfOptions
The example invalid-fx-36-02.xml is invalid against rule fx-45 as well as fx-36. Correct invalid-fx-36-02.xml so it is only invalid gainst fx-36.
The example invalid-fx-36-01.xml is invalid against rule fx-42 as well as fx-36. Correct the example so it is only invalid against fx-36.
The new FX rules that apply to Trade and Contract need a guard constraint to restrict them to FX. As a simple example, those FX rules will probably be invalid when applied to CDS, IRS, EQS, etc. The affected rules are: fx036, fx-36b, fx-37, fx-37b, fx38, fx38b, fx-39, fx-39b, fx-40, and fx-40b. The FX Product … Continued
Invalid examples are needed for fx-36b, fx-37b, fx-38b, fx-39b, fx-40b.
Some of the ird rules use the function “contains()” rather than “exists()”. In each case the usage shows that what is meant is exists() and not contains(). As per the FpML Validation Architecture, where a term is not defined we use the XPath2 definition. Changing the contains() to exists() would bring the ird into line … Continued
The constraint ird-15 depends on an optional element existing. When the element does not exist there is no result from the constraint. The rule today: ” ird-15 (Mandatory) Context: CalculationPeriodDates (complex type) [isParametric] terminationDate/unadjustedDate > firstPeriodStartDate/unadjustedDate. ” The element //element(*, CalculationPeriodDates)/firstPeriodStartDate is optional.
There is a problem with ird-16. The rules requires an optional element to be present. The rule today is: ” ird-16 (Mandatory) Context: CalculationPeriodDates (complex type) [isParametric] terminationDate/unadjustedDate > firstRegularPeriodStartDate. ” The problem is that //element(*, CalculationPeriodDates)/firstPeriodStartDate is optional.