FpML-AWG-Legacy Fwd: [fpml-arch-modelling-wg] Re: Modelling Approach

["Danielle Cauthen" <dcauthen@xxxxxxxx>]

--- In fpml-arch-modelling-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Marcus Rainbow"
<marcus.rainbow@...> wrote:

Excellent document.

coupla points.

1. Capitalization.  There is a clash between two standards here.   XML
tags
are traditionally lower case, because this compresses better with typical
text content.  There are OO methodologies that use case to distinguish
between classes and objects.   My suggestion is that we stick to the XML
standard.

2.  Class hierarchy.  The example shows premium being an instance of
Money,
ie. an object derived from a class.  What about a class derived from a
class?

class Payment : public Money
{
private:
    DATE    paydate;
};

The xml looks like:

<cashflow>    <!-- instance of Payment -->
    <ccy>USD</ccy>
    <amount>42</amount>
    <paydate>12-03-2000</paydate>
</cashflow>

Where is the attribute that tells us the derivation from Money?

3.  Namespaces.  The versioning draft document states that a currency code
should live in its own namespace because it is external to FpML.  The
modeling document states that classes
should not be implemented as nested tags.  Is there an inconsistency here?

old scheme using external namespaces, rather longwinded tags to make
it more
understandable.
    <ccy1><isoccy:ccy>USD</isoccy:ccy></ccy1>

new scheme
    <ccy1>USD</ccy1> where ccy1 has a FIXED attribute e-class='Ccy'

My question is where does the namespace go?  Perhaps e-class='isoccy:Ccy',
but this is not clear from the modeling document.


Marcus

--- End forwarded message ---



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe awglegacy youremail@address
To view archives: http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_awglegacymail/threads.html