FpML Issues Tracker

Summary

The precondition 'isParametric' is attached to the majority of the IRD rules. The precondition is satisfied (true) where InterestRateStream/cashflows is absent ("does not exist"), or cashflows/cashflowsMatchParameters is true; in other words (informally) in all cases where not(cashflowsMatchParameters is false).

The purpose of cashflowsMatchParameters is to declare whether (or not) the content of cashflows (multiple paymentCalculationPeriods, etc.) is consistent with the mandatory parametric expression of the InterestRateStream.

However, the consistency (or otherwise) of the cashflows with the parametric expression has no bearing on the internal consistency of the parametrics themselves.

Let's take an example: ird-14 states that terminationDate > effectiveDate (informally). But if the rule is subject to the 'isParametric' precondition, then it is not enforced where cashflowMatchParameters=false. The implication is that I can write an FpML document where terminationDate precedes effectiveDate, and have it considered valid through the simple device of producing cashflows with cashflowsMatchParameters=false - this is nonsensical.

The majority of the IRD validation rules are concerned with expressing relationships between parametric components of the InterestRateStream. There are no rules in the current IRD set which enforce integrities between the parametric and 'cashflows' expressions of the InterestRateStream, and therefore no rules for which the isParametric precondition is relevant.

On this basis, I propose that the 'isParametric' precondition is removed from all rules in the IRD scope to which it is currently applied.