FpML Issues Tracker
closed
Minor
Have not tried
Validation Rules
Admin
danieldui
Summary
The context for the rule should be 'FxSwapLeg'.
A similar rule fx-20 exists for FxSingleLeg.
closed
Minor
Have not tried
Validation Rules
Admin
danieldui
The context for the rule should be 'FxSwapLeg'.
A similar rule fx-20 exists for FxSingleLeg.
Notes:
danieldui
04/19/11 2:44 pm
Discussed on 19 Apr 2011.
ACTION on Irina to update rule fx-50 as AJ suggested
iyermakova
04/20/11 2:31 pm
It seems that the fx-50 has the right context.
Should fx-20 and fx-50 be consolidated into one fx-20 rule with two examples, one for FX Single Leg and one for FX Swap? They both share the same “FxSwapLeg” type.
danieldui
04/20/11 2:46 pm
I don’t think so.
My understanding is that:
fx-20 checks spot fx trades. I.e., the context should be FxSingleLeg, which is used in the element fxSingleLeg.
fx-50 checks fx swaps. I.e., the context should be FxSwapLeg, which is used in elements …/fxSwap/nearLeg and …/fxSwap/farLeg.
Andrew, can you confirm?
iyermakova
05/10/11 7:33 pm
Corrected rule-50: changed the context to ‘FxSwapLeg’.
The correction will be published with FpML-5-2
iyermakova
05/17/11 5:12 pm
Added DD’s comments to rules fx-20, fx-50 as below
“This rule is similar in its implementation to the rule fx-50, but used for a different type of FX product.”