FpML Discussion

General FpML Discussion Proposals & Extensions Recomendation for Master view and Extensions Approach

This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  mgratacos 2 years, 5 months ago.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
  • #2022


    I have a few questions that could be great if someone could help me to answer: 1) Is there any recommendation or sample as to how to create a master view (Given that we could have 4 views of the same trade : confirmation, record-keeping, transparency and reporting)? 2) Also, should this be done as an external XSD extension file per instrument class type, (e.g., inside of the Swap schema)? 3) Should routing be handled if at an aggregation (like a portfolio). Two portfolios (one with native FpML Swap) and second with view and data behind the views. 4) If none of the above, how have ISDA or FpML suggest development firms approach this problem? a. Writing their own XML envelope outside of FpML, or b. extending inside of an FpML instrument to have instrument level routing and user defined fields (thus enhancing the standard XSD types and subtrees from FpML 5.3). Thanks in advance.




    As initial step, my recommendation would be to look at the existing FpML Master Schema. The Master Schema is available in each FpML version. If you look at the latest one, FpML 5.10, it is available at: (See Master Schema section)

    See also papers on:
    Master Schema –
    FpML View Generation Syntax –

    Best Regards,

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.