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.
An element referenced in ird-23 do not exist in the FpML schema. The rule today is: ” ird-23 (Mandatory) Context: StubCalculationPeriodAmount (complex type) iff(exist initialStub, calculationPeriodDates element referenced by calculationPeriodDates/@href contains at least one of: * firstPeriodStartDate * firstRegularPeriodStartDate ). ” The element that does not exist in FpML is: //element(*, StubCalculationPeriodAmount)/calculationPeriodDates
The term “regularPeriod” can be written out as a function as per the Validation Architecture. The reason why the function is so much better is that the context of all the item is no longer ambiguous – it becomes explicit. The XQuery equivalent is included for comparison only. The proposal does not advocate XQuery, it … Continued
The issues with ird-11 are identical to those with ird-10.
ird-10 contains some ambiguity that requires clarification. The rule today is: ” ird-10 (Mandatory) Context: CalculationPeriodDates (complex type) [isParametric] [calculationPeriodFrequency/rollConvention is a number] If firstRegularPeriodStartDate exists, then the start date is firstRegularPeriodStartDate, else the start date is effectiveDate/unadjustedDate. If calculationPeriodFrequency/rollConvention is less than or equal to the last day of the month in the start … Continued
The numbering for the test cases sometimes starts at 01, and sometimes starts at 00. For example invalid-ird-14-00.xml. Please make the numbering consistent so they all start at 00 or 01.
The test case invalid-ln-11-01.xml is also invalid for ln-20. Please fix the test case so it is only invalid for ln-11.
ird-31 uses the term “contains” differently to its definition. The rule should be changed to use terms as defined. The rule today: ” ird-31 (Mandatory) Context: CalculationPeriod (complex type) Must contain unadjustedEndDate and/or adjustedEndDate. ” The proposal: ” ird-31 (Mandatory) Context: CalculationPeriod (complex type) unadjustedEndDate exists or adjustedEndDate exists. “
The constraint ref-10 needs a guard on the existence of the tested item. The rule today: ” ref-10 (Mandatory) Context: PaymentCalculationPeriod (complex type) The @href attribute = the @id attribute of an element of type PricingStructure. ” The problem is that //element(*, PaymentCalculationPeriod)/@href is optional. The rule could be rewritten as: ” ref-10 (Mandatory) Context: … Continued