Date

29 May 2018

Attendees

Agenda

1) Use Case reminder

2) Where we are on our road map.

3) Open Action Items

4) JIRA Issues Review - https://jira.edmcouncil.org/projects/DER/issues/DER-10?filter=allopenissues

5) Todays content discussion.

All impressed with FIBO presentation last week, says John Nowlin. JP was impressed and is preparing a use case. JP reached out to DN and there will be a time set up for a call.JP told JN that he can share JP use case with us. But, it needs some concrete connection with data sources. Will be shared with DN and DWiz. JN working on more concrete data sources. Important thing is that people are excited following the presentation. Need to get data sources and turn the use case into an RFP for a full blown Pilot. JP impressed with DNs machine learning. Likes idea of drilling into the graph and doing much more complex queries than possible with SQL server to do without error. Will look at Allegrograph. Reviewing the existing proposal and then turn that into a real RFP.

DN People were smiling and acting mostly positive. What about the big guy who said he was in standards. JN Has not talked with him. Talking mostly to James and J P Rothenburg. Maybe the standards person is Jim Fey. He does data collection standards.

DN In the meantime are there next steps for the Council? JN None that can be discussed openly. Will need to take that off line. OK to talk to Wells Fargo, but not direct to people who might write a proposal.

DN will reach out to JP and set up a call for June 4th.

DN We have a Unique Swap Identifier issue to discuss with the DER Team. To EK, why do we use applies to and not identifies? EK We were worried if this applies to the contract or to the transaction. If there is more than one transaction that is in a swap then it could be another thing. Could be a trade identifier. DN asks JN to clarify how this works. DN We also have tradeIdentifier. Not the same as swapIndentifier. JN There may be multiple transactions on the same swapIdentifier. Jeff said it correctly. The USI stays with the contract as a whole for its entire life time.

ACTION: EK must make a change. DW asks Jeff to write down how this works. USI is not a subset of the UTI. UTI is for the actual transactions as they occur. JN There could be multiple transactions with the same USI. DN Do we need more words to make this more clear? Jeff There is some ambiguity among the very people who wrote these rules. Best to "wait until the dust settles". Transaction is more general than trade. JB to check Elisa's work. Needs to have a min 0 restriction. Leave instrumentIdentifer as it is. Make it clear that instrumentIdentifier is not a contract identifier. This is JIRA DER-32. FROM Jeff Braswell: All swaps reported to the CFTC must have a USI, i.e., min 1. The USI is in fact an identifier of a swap for the CFTC.Other swaps in other jurisdictions may not have a USIqualified by jurisdiction. For example, OTC Derivatives in EU must now have an ISIN as the identifier. USI is a term specific to the CFTC at the moment thoughI don't recommend promoting USI. That is only one class of derivative, ISINs will become more broad identifiers of derivatives, including swaps.

DN We need to at least say that Swaps have identifiers. We should not depend on a reasoner to make the decision for us. Identifies has a very important meaning. We need to at least have a restriction between a swap and something that identifies a swap. JN There is a swap USI for intent to clear and for it is cleared. EK This is US specific. We should need to create a class named US Swap. DN a USI does not need to be US specific. The format could be specific. But the concept is generic. Do we need to assume that it is only US related? EK Yes. JN It is an international effort. EK There should be a unique contract identifier. EK will make this more specific. JB The ISN is not just US swaps. It is all swaps traded in the US. DN Why should this not be totally specific. EK and JB That would be far too granular. DN Then, maybe the financialInstrumentIdentifer covers it. But, Would like to see a specific identifier. That would be a min 0 restriction. Can this happen. Do not want to leave this up to the reasoner. We should have specific restrictions.

Jeff How did we get to contract type being viewed as an instance? EK FIGI does that. EK We need to work through this. Perhaps the identifier should be the instrument identifier.

Dean if we talk about isIdentifiedBy, then we need to be more specific to get the right answer. Sometimes need to say more things. Need to look at this on a case by case basis. If the inference does not work, then need to make the model specific. But, FIBO needs to be generic. This is not how the Wells Fargo Ontology might work.

EK Every account on the planet has an account identifier. Then this would have a Min 0. JB, But not everything does.

Dean There is a miss spelling in the definition of swap. EK raise the issue in DER assign to Elisa. DER-51.

EK Almost all of the .etc has been eliminated with the expectation that MB would make changes in FND, but that has not happened.

6) For next week.

Proceedings:

Decisions:

Action items

Elisa Kendall EK must make a change. DW asks Jeff to write down how this works. USI is not a subset of the UTI. UTI is for the actual transactions as they occur. JN There could be multiple transactions with the same USI. DN Do we need more words to make this more clear? Jeff There is some ambiguity among the very people who wrote these rules. Best to "wait until the dust settles". Transaction is more general than trade. Tahoe Blue to check Elisa's work. Needs to have a min 0 restriction. Leave instrumentIdentifer as it is. Make it clear that instrumentIdentifier is not a contract identifier. This is JIRA DER-32. FROM Jeff Braswell: All swaps reported to the CFTC must have a USI, i.e., min 1. The USI is in fact an identifier of a swap for the CFTC.Other swaps in other jurisdictions may not have a USIqualified by jurisdiction. For example, OTC Derivatives in EU must now have an ISIN as the identifier. USI is a term specific to the CFTC at the moment thoughI don't recommend promoting USI. That is only one class of derivative, ISINs will become more broad identifiers of derivatives, including swaps.

Browser not supported