FpML Issues Tracker

525: adjustable[…]Date and adjusted[…]Date elements

December 7, 2007





Modeling Task Force




Modeling Task Force recommendation: Eliminate standalone adjustable[...]Date and adjusted[...]Date elements throughout the schema, and replace with the version 5 AdjustableDate types, which includes either or both.


  • iyermakova

    12/07/07 8:25 pm

    Reviewed at Modeling Task Force on 11/30/2007. Assigned to all working groups.

  • mgratacos

    12/17/07 11:38 am

    MTF minutes, Dec. 14, 2007

    Discussion of adjustable dates
    We briefly discussed Marc’s email on adjusted dates. The group was ok with adding an adjusted date to the adjustable date structure, assuming that this can be controlled by view (e.g. no adjusted date in confirmation view). The group felt that the most important thing was to ensure that for every unadjusted date, you could provide an adjusted date, but the exact structure was less important (e.g. perhaps we could use a model group rather than a type, though the type seems better). We would like to make sure that the structure we come up with doesn’t make everything optional; i.e. you should have to provide at least one of the unadjusted or adjusted dates.

  • mgratacos

    09/03/08 5:41 pm

    Changes as described in the attached document have been committed to the 5-0 branch.

    The only open issue related to this is to implement the changes in the payment structures within Credit Derivatives. The existing structures have adjusted payment elements that could be removed.

  • Leave an update

    You must be logged in to post an update.