FpML-FXWG-Legacy Fwd: FW: [fpml-fx] 2 questions regarding FX DTD

["Danielle Cauthen" <dcauthen@xxxxxxxx>]

--- In fpml-fx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Rick Schumacher 
<rick.schumacher@...> wrote:

Justin has tidyed up the DTD ... see his comments below.

Rick


-----Original Message-----
From: Oglethorpe, Justin [IT] [mailto:justin.oglethorpe@...]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 1:53 PM
To: 'Rick Schumacher'
Subject: RE: [fpml-fx] 2 questions regarding FX DTD


Rick,
Here's the cleaned-up DTD.

I have:

- removed most of the comments except any required for later 
sythesis with
the other product WG DTDs
- ensured all compound elements with content models are based on a %
FpML_
entity
- removed a couple of redundant elements ("routing" and "address") 
that were
really just entities
- added a "cutNameScheme" attribute to "cutName"
- added "type" attributes where they were missing
- removed the non-FX products from OUR version of the %
FpML_ProductList, so
that we don't have DTD errors reported
- corrected a few elements that weren't defined as standard text type
- resorted all the element definitions alphabetically, for ease of
navigation
- probably forgotten a few other things I did!

I hope this is what you were expecting. Let me know if there is 
anything
else I should be doing.

Best regards,
Justin.


Justin Oglethorpe
+44 (0) 20 7508 3852 (desk)

This message is confidential and the property of Citigroup. It may 
also
be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or 
other
legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by
reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the
message or disclose its contents to anyone.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Schumacher [mailto:rick.schumacher@...]
Sent: 03 December 2001 18:15
To: Oglethorpe, Justin [IT]
Subject: RE: [fpml-fx] 2 questions regarding FX DTD


Oops ... I forgot to send out the Minutes from last week.  Not good,
considering I even took the time to write them up.  I'll do that now.

To quickly answer your question, we DID NOT change the name.  
However, 1% of
notional would be represented as 0.01 (and not 1.0) ... just like a 
forward
point would be shown as 0.0001 and not 1.

Yep ... it sounds like you got the id and href work correct on the 
options
stuff.

Thanks for working on this.

Regards,
Rick


-----Original Message-----
From: Oglethorpe, Justin [IT] [mailto:justin.oglethorpe@...]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 1:03 PM
To: 'Rick Schumacher'
Subject: FW: [fpml-fx] 2 questions regarding FX DTD


Rick,
Was a decision made last Thursday about renaming
"percentageOfCallCurrencyAmount" as "fractionOfCallCurrencyAmount", 
as Brian
suggested?

Also, I have gone with removing the "id" attributes of 
callCurrencyAmount
and putCurrencyAmount and I have taken the word "Reference" out of 
the names
of "optionOnCurrencyReference" and "faceOnCurrencyReference" and 
made them
simple text fields, as per your proposal in the parallel e-mail. Is 
everyone
happy with this?

Sorry for the delay in getting the cleaned-up DTD to you. If you can 
answer
these questions now, I'll be able to save the work and send you the 
DTD.

Best regards,
Justin.

Justin Oglethorpe
+44 (0) 20 7508 3852 (desk)
+44 (0) 7818 458231 (mobile)

This message is confidential and the property of Citigroup. It may 
also
be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or 
other
legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by
reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the
message or disclose its contents to anyone.


-----Original Message-----
From: brian.lynn@... [mailto:brian.lynn@...] 
Sent: 28 November 2001 18:13
To: fpml-fx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [fpml-fx] 2 questions regarding FX DTD




1.

It looks like percentages are represented in raw decimal terms in 
FpML 1.0
(and I assume 2.0).  This would mean 1% would be represented as 0.01.
Similarly spreads in basis points are represented in decimal terms, 
e.g. 13
bp would be 0.0013.

I would recommend being consistent with that unless there is a 
compelling
reason to the contrary.

"percentageofcallcurrencyamount" could perhaps be renamed
"fractionofcallcurrencyamount" to avoid confusion.

2.
I think that either is acceptable.  The href just ensures 
consistency (so
you don't inadvertently use a currency other than one of the deal
currencies).

The parser complaint suggests that #PUTCURRENCY is not defined 
correctly in
the example (or maybe the DTD?).  If it is used, there should be 
only one,
and everything else should reference it.

- Brian




rick.schumacher@... on 11/28/2001 12:23:45 PM

Please respond to fpml-fx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To:   fpml-fx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:
Subject:  [fpml-fx] 2 questions regarding FX DTD


As Ned has been working on the FX OTC options examples, he has run 
into a
couple of issues that I'll raise here.  Justin/Dan ... perhaps you 
could
offer comments, since both of these are based upon the original 
Citi / UBS
Warburg spec.

1. Use of premiumValue field.  Ned noticed that the Citi-UBS spec 
appears
to
be inconsistent in how the are representing the premiumValue field 
in the
two examples in the spec with options.

In the first example, the Citi-UBS spec uses:
<premiumValue>0.001</premiumValue>
<premiumQuoteBasis>percentageofcallcurrencyamount</premiumQuoteBasis>
     In that example, this means 0.1%.

In the next example (option strategy uses):
<premiumValue>1.375</premiumValue>
<premiumQuoteBasis>percentageofcallcurrencyamount</premiumQuoteBasis>
     In that example, this means 1.375%.

This is inconsistent ... we should either be expressing things in
percentage
terms (1.0 means 1%) or in raw decimal terms (.01 means 1%).  Which 
should
we do?  The premiumQuoteBasisScheme contains values like
PERCENTAGEOFCALLCURRENCYAMOUNT, so since we've already specified 
that this
is a percentage, perhaps we should consistently use 1.0 to represent 
1%,
and
not 0.01.

2. optionOnCurrencyReference and faceOnCurrencyReference.  In doing 
an
option strategy, Ned found that the parser was complaining about 
having
duplicate id's defined for PUTCURRENCY.  Ned is wondering why we 
need the
href at all ... can't we just use the currency code instead?

     e.g., instead of <optionOnCurrencyReference 
href="#PUTCURRENCY"/>

     use <optionOnCurrency>EUR</optionOnCurrency>


Rick

--- End forwarded message ---



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