Latest Posts

eqd-19 is: ” Context: EquityOption, EquityDerivativeShortFormBase (complex type) eqd-19 (Mandatory) Preconditions: SameCurrency If notional, equityPremium/percentageOfNotional and equityPremium/paymentAmount are present, then equityPremium/paymentAmount/amount = notional/amount * equityPremium/percentageOfNotional ” The precondition “SameCurrency” is too strong. The only items that must be the same currency are the paymentAmount and the notional amount. We shouldn’t be checking the other items. … Continued

The context for eqd-17 doesn’t take into account optional fields. The rule today is: ” Context: EquityOption, EquityDerivativeShortFormBase (complex type) eqd-17 (Mandatory) equityExercise/equityAmericanExercise/equityMultipleExercise/maximumNumberOfOptions * equityExercise/equityAmericanExercise/equityMultipleExercise/integralMultipleExercise >= numberOfOptions. ” This is a change. The rule was changed in issue #457. This fixed one problem but removed the handling of optional fields from the context. The correct … Continued

What is the status of https://dedicated.fpml.org/svn/fpml/trunk/src/validation/rules-english-eqd-wip.xml Most of these rules no longer look to be WIP. I suggest the file is updated and the repository brought back into line with the current state of the world.

Either eqd-27 or eqd-16 should be retired. The rules today: ” Context: EquityMultipleExercise (complex type) eqd-16 (Mandatory) minimumNumberOfOptions < maximumNumberOfOptions. eqd-27 (Mandatory) minimumNumberOfOptions

eqd-26 is broken because numberOfOptions is not visible within the context of EquityMultipleExercise. The rule today: ” Context: EquityMultipleExercise (complex type) eqd-26 (Mandatory) maxiumumNumberOfOptions

There is a spelling mistake in rule eqd-26 The rule today is: ” eqd-26 (Mandatory) maxiumumNumberOfOptions

In the EQDWG rules the context of Equity Option needs to be indicated as a complex type, rather than a element. The XPath for a type is “//element(*, EquityOption)”. Although the VWG chose to use XPath for axis, they don’t do this for contexts, where instead they use plain-ish English. This change is to propose … Continued

The CD rules that apply to Trade, also need to apply to Contracts. The context of the rules today is: “# Trade (complex type): cd-1 cd-1b cd-2 cd-3 cd-4 ” The proposed correction is: “# Trade (complex type), Contract (complex type): cd-1 cd-1b cd-2 cd-3 cd-4 “

The EQD rules that have a context of “Trade (complex type)”, also need a context of “Contract (complex type)”. The context today: “# Trade (complex type): eqd-1 eqd-2 eqd-4 eqd-5 eqd-12 eqd-13 eqd-14” The context should be: “# Trade (complex type), Contract (complex type): eqd-1 eqd-2 eqd-4 eqd-5 eqd-12 eqd-13 eqd-14”

The supposedly invalid example invalid-eqd-4-01.xml is valid. Please correct it by making it invalid. The rule is: ” eqd-4 (Mandatory) //equityExercise/equityBermudaExercise/commencementDate/adjustableDate/unadjustedDate must be greater than or equal to tradeHeader/tradeDate. ” commencementDate is 2002-02-17Z tradeDate is 2002-01-17Z There is a mysterious comment next to the date: “” I can’t find the change that changed the date … Continued