shared-14 has been recently changed and is now incorrect. The current rule is: Every $calculationAgentPartyReference in //calculationAgentPartyReference satisfies $calculationAgentPartyReference/@href eq party/@id The correct rule is: every $calculationAgentPartyReference in //calculationAgentPartyReference satisfies $calculationAgentPartyReference/@href = party/@id This is related to issues #971 and #972.
shared-13 has “=” substituted with “eq”. See issue #971 for the same problem with shared-12.
A recent change to shared-12 changed it from using “=” to “eq”, and it is now incorrect. See issue #929 for what was agreed (the correct XPath). The current XPath is: Every $buyerPartyReference in //buyerPartyReference satisfies $buyerPartyReference/@href eq (trade/tradeSide/@id, party/@id) The correct XPath is: every $buyerPartyReference in //buyerPartyReference satisfies $buyerPartyReference/@href = (trade/tradeSide/@id, party/@id)
The calculationAgent and calculationAgentParty elements under CalculationAgent.model are still annotated in terms of optional early termination (see diagram attached) – probably the elements were copied-and-pasted from the context of the OptionalEarlyTermination type. This looks strange in the context of Trade (which has a CalculationAgent.model child) – the element annotations should be changed to process-neutral descriptions, … Continued
Based on ISDA changes to the compounding methods, a new ‘SpreadExclusive’ value should be added to the CompoundingMethodEnum.
In 11 cases the XPath keyword “every” is spelt with a capital “E” as “Every”. This is an XPath error. All other cases in the rules are correct. The errors are in the following locations. Given is the file name, line number, and row of text that is the problem. C:workingeuropa-fall-wsfpml-trunksrcvalidationrules-english-cd.xml(150): Description: Every documentation/contractualSupplement must … Continued
I propose the following comment for shared-1: “You only have business centres for business day calculations when there is a business day convention.”
Recent editing introduced an error into the context of shared-5. The rule today is: ” shared-5 (Mandatory) English Description: Context: payerPartyReference DirectionalLeg (complex type) … … ” payerPartyReference shouldn’t be part of the context.
The sample file valid-eqd-26-01.xml does not exercise eqd-26. Please fix the sample.
The sample invalid-eqd-26b-01.xml fails the wrong rule. It should fail eqd-26, but doesn’t. Instead it fails eqd-18. The solution is to fix the example.