[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem

To: <prwg@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
From: "Brian Lynn" <brian.lynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:45:56 -0400
In-reply-to: <OFD7215C1F.E3A22454-ON8025729F.002B53B3-8025729F.002BAB67@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: GEM
References: <003801c76687$84271380$6c00a8c0@gemxp1> <OFD7215C1F.E3A22454-ON8025729F.002B53B3-8025729F.002BAB67@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Sender: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acdm15nwM6qtHMc9S6ikZ4ijQWJfBwAH2jWQ

I hadn't thought of this as breaking backward compatibility, but rather as
fixing an error in the schema, but I guess you are right.

If this is so, we need to get approval of the Standards Committee to make
the change before implementing it.  I expect that this would be
straightforward if no one in this group has any objection to the change,
given that it is localized and the number of affected people is likely to be
small.

Does anyone in this group have any objection to making this change in 4.3?
If not, I will request permission at the next Stds. Committee meeting.

Best regards,

Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: prwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:prwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
andrew.p.parry@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:57 AM
To: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem

Brian

Good idea, the present content model in FpML-4-2-rec allows a valuationSet 
within TradeValuationItem without any means of identifying what it relates 
to, since both partyTradeIdentifier and trade occur 0 to unbounded 

Downside is that this breaks document backwards compatibility within the 
4.x series, because you are introducing new mandatory content

Andrew Parry
+44 20 7325 1486
IBML Product Manager
http://ibml.jpmorgan.com




"Brian Lynn" <brian.lynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: prwg@xxxxxxxx
14/03/2007 22:24
Please respond to
prwg@xxxxxxxx


To
<prwg@xxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem






Unless I hear otherwise, I'll recommend to change the schema to make trade 
valuation item contain a choice between 1 or more partyTradeIdentifiers 
and 1 trade.  I think this should be done in 4.3, given that 4.2 is in 
trial.
 
Comments welcome.
 

From: prwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:prwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brian Lynn
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:34 AM
To: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
 
Sorry not to reply earlier .
 
I didn't originally develop this structure, and I don't have any great 
answers for you.
 
On the face of it, there seems to need to be only one trade per trade 
valuation item.  There could be multiple partyTradeIdentifiers identifying 
the same trade.
 
Does anyone have any objection to changing the content model to eliminate 
the possibility of including 
1)       more than one trade per trade valuation item, and
2)       both a trade and a partyTradeIdentifier?
 
If not, we need to think about when/how to implement, since this has been 
in since 4.1 and removing this flexibility is arguably not backwards 
compatible .. We could declare it an error but theoretically it should be 
approved by the Stds Committee.
 
- Brian
 

From: prwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:prwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc Gratacos
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 6:50 AM
To: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
 
Brian,
 
Any thoughts on this? See below.
 
Thanks,
Marc
 

From: prwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:prwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc Gratacos
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 12:38 PM
To: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
 
Brian,
 
Maybe I am missing something but I am looking at the content of 
TradeValuationItem and I don't understand its content model. Why do we 
have trade with maxOccurs="unbounded"? Shouldn't we have a single trade 
element only?
 
In addition, shouldn't we have a choice between partyTradeIdentifier and 
trade?
 
<xsd:complexType name="TradeValuationItem">
  <xsd:annotation>
   <xsd:documentation xml:lang="en">A type used in trade valuation enquiry 
messages which relates a trade identifier to its current 
value.</xsd:documentation>
  </xsd:annotation>
  <xsd:sequence>
   <xsd:element name="partyTradeIdentifier" type="PartyTradeIdentifier" 
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
    <xsd:annotation>
     <xsd:documentation xml:lang="en">One or more trade identifiers needed 
to uniquely identify a trade.</xsd:documentation>
    </xsd:annotation>
   </xsd:element>
   <xsd:element name="trade" type="Trade" minOccurs="0" 
maxOccurs="unbounded">
    <xsd:annotation>
     <xsd:documentation xml:lang="en">Fully-described trades whose values 
are reported.</xsd:documentation>
    </xsd:annotation>
   </xsd:element>
   <xsd:element ref="valuationSet">
    <xsd:annotation>
     <xsd:documentation xml:lang="en">The trade 
valuation.</xsd:documentation>
    </xsd:annotation>
   </xsd:element>
  </xsd:sequence>
 </xsd:complexType>
 

From: prwg@xxxxxxxx on behalf of Brian Lynn
Sent: Wed 8/23/2006 18:30
To: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
The issue says that the TradeValuationItem should probably have only one 
partyTradeIdentifier, or there should be a rule that if there is more than 
one partyTradeIdentifier, it should refer to the same trade.
 
The existing documentation on that item says, "One or more trade 
identifiers needed to uniquely identify a trade."   This implies that the 
multiple trade IDs are for the same trade.  I'm not sure if it's possible 
to create a rule that enforces this. 
 
Should we update the documentation on the element to make this more 
explicit?
 
- Brian
 
 

From: prwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:prwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc Gratacos
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 5:20 AM
To: prwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
 
Brian,
 
See question posted in the issues list: 
http://www.fpml.org/issues/view.php?id=204 
 
Kind Regards,
-Marc
+13472846531
 
 
 
****************************************************************************
********************************************** 
The information contained in either this email and, if applicable, the 
attachment, are confidential and are intended only for the recipient. The 
contents of either the email or the attachment may not be disclosed or 
used by anyone other than the addressee. If you are not the intended 
recipient(s), any use, disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited 
and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, 
please notify us by e-mail at isda@xxxxxxxx then delete the e-mail and all 
attachments and any copies thereof. This communication is part of an ISDA 
process and is not intended for unauthorized use or distribution. 
****************************************************************************
**********************************************



-----------------------------------------
This communication is for informational purposes only. It is not
intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of
any financial instrument or as an official confirmation of any
transaction. All market prices, data and other information are not
warranted as to completeness or accuracy and are subject to change
without notice. Any comments or statements made herein do not
necessarily reflect those of JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries
and affiliates.

This transmission may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or
use of the information contained herein (including any reliance
thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and any
attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect
that might affect any computer system into which it is received and
opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it
is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by JPMorgan Chase &
Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for any loss
or damage arising in any way from its use. If you received this
transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and
destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard
copy format. Thank you.
Please refer to http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/terms for important
disclosures under the Terms of Use.

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

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

References:
- RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
  - From: Brian Lynn
- RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
  - From: andrew . p . parry

Prev by Date: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
Next by Date: FpML-PRWG FW: [members@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] FIX Algorithmic Schema - Request for Comment
Previous by thread: RE: FpML-VALU TradeValuationItem
Next by thread: FpML-VALU ISDA FpML Training Courses in New York
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread