Author: Admin

441: eqd-4 incorrect spelling of context type

By

eqd-4 states: “Context: EquityBermudanExercise (complex type)” This is incorrect. The additional “n” in “Bermudan” is an error. It should be: “Context: EquityBermudaExercise (complex type)”

440: Add an architecture rule that constraints can only be applied on in scope nodes

By

There is a problem today with some of the validation rules – they define a narrow context and then test constraints on elements that are out of scope for that context. For example, take eqd-1: ” Context: EquityAmericanExercise (complex type). commencementDate/adjustableDate/unadjustedDate must be equal to ../../../tradeHeader/tradeDate” The problem with this is that tradeHeader/tradeDate is out … Continued

439: Define contains for content

By

The word “contains” needs to be defined for the validation rules. I suggest we adopt the XPath definition in the fn:contains without the use of a collation. This is significant for alphabets with accents, diaresis, etc.

438: Applicability of preconditions is undefined

By

The Validation Preconditions only apply when specific rules reference them. This is not defined in the Manual or the rules. Add a definition of when the preconditions apply. At the moment this is very unclear. I have seen preconditions applied incorrectly. If the preconditions apply selectively then they are not preconditions, but just a library … Continued

437: EQD documentation precondition is out of date

By

The documentation precondition on the EQD rules is out of date. It currently states: “Precondition: ISDA1999 The documentation/contractualDefinitions element or the documentation/masterConfirmation/masterConfirmationType element contains ISDA1999Credit.” 1. This shouldn’t be a precondition, because the rules should apply to all usage of the schema. 2. Most contracts are now ISDA20002, but anyway all should be covered (see … Continued

436: Distinguish between existence and prescence

By

All references to “present” in the validation rules must be changed to “exists”. For example, from: “If firstPeriodStartDate is present, @href must match the @id attribute of a party element.” To: “If firstPeriodStartDate exists, @href must match the @id attribute of a party element.” The distinction between present and exists is significant. Take the example … Continued

435: Ambiguity in business process rule 1

By

The rule states: ” Context: Novation. If firstPeriodStartDate is present, @href must match the @id attribute of a party element.” It should be rewritten to state: ” Context: //element(*, Novation). When firstPeriodStartDate is present, then firstPeriodStartDate/@href must correlate to a //element(*, Party)/@partyId”. The changes here are: 1. We need to know it is the href … Continued

433: Correct relative path for validation examples

By

All examples have a correct relative path for validation except for Validation examples. Please add a relative path so they can be validated. This is especially important as validation uses the schema type information in its rules.