/
2017-08-22 Meeting notes

2017-08-22 Meeting notes

Owned by Dennis Wisnosky
Last updated: Oct 31, 2017

Date

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/FCP/issues/FCP-4?filter=allopenissues

5) Todays content discussion.

SMIF OWL-UML

SKOS

RDF/S

6) For next week.

Proceedings:

20170823 FIBO CFTC Pilot

 

Elisa goes over status of our understanding of data.

 

JN concerned that if we don't have the complete story, the SDRs will ignore us. EK: Yes, but we need to have more ontologies than we have to do this. We don't have semantics for every trade that every bank would do generally. Need to make some choices that are quite specific. Must decide what is semantically definable, not just contents of a database.

 

Part of the question is what goes in the report vs what is in the trade.

 

DN to EK: What pattern are you following. Same as in IND.

 

DN: Do we have a skeletal structure? Should there be one in FND? EK: In FBC is where it would go. DN: What about in FND to have a report skeleton?  DN: To JN, We will support CFTC no matter what.

 

JN: The idea of a report was maybe not the right word. The life cycle of transactions are what is important to the CFTC. EK: Yes, we do have tradeLifecycle.   

 

JN: The spreadsheet provided is the data CFTC expects coming in. But, the 4 SDRs have interpreted each their own way.  Kate is pushing to use ISO as the standard, not CFTC and the SDRs each doing its own thing. So, don't think what was provided as being cast in stone. The goal is to use FIBO and ISO and say, "this is it".

 

DN: Yes, we would have a 2 phase load. 1) load in what comes from the SDRs. 2) write a set of rules that will eliminate bespoke stuff and focus on the standard.

 

JN: We ask for a snapshot as a sort of belt and suspenders approach to figure out what an SDR is really saying.

 

Max: Status is a static concept and report is a dynamic concept. EK: A snapshot could be an event or the state of the content that is being reported.  Max: A report is a snapshot by definition. The terms snapshot does not relate to an event. It is arbitrary. JN and EK agree.

 

EK: State of the trade is not the same as the state of the report.  Max to JN: When do you see snapshots? JN: At the end of every day. Used to see end of day positions so that they can be aggregated. Max: No event caused the report. It is just a routine report. EK: All is reported. Need to have some notion as to did something cause an event in a report.  DN: It is a payload. May not even be a report.

 

JN: It is not correct to say, "nothing has changed, here is a snapshot". Because, sometimes there are changes. A Snapshot is the status of everything, whether there are changes or not.  JN: It is the total record, not the diffs.

 

DN to JN: How do you want to use this? What would be the most useful? JN: Way above authority. Snapshot should be in a report. Max: could use SPARQL query to infer what is going, not ask for more data. JN: Yes! EK: Will work on this,

 

JN: CME does report Snapshots. DN: Isn't the notion of sub product legacy and not applicable here? So, we would have children as part of a subsumption hierarchy, not subs. Subs create limitations.  JN: UPIs are supposed to deal with this. Max: Good luck! JN: Agree, inference will tell us this anyway because of FIBO.

 

JN: Keep the eye on the prize - to sell CFTC on FIBO, not to stick the square peg of the CFTC data base into a round hole. Max: Flexibility is what is required, not just capturing all of the labels.  EK: have some more actions such as finding the MIC codes.

 

JN: Row 39 Field is wrong. Should be Submitter ID. EK: Will change.  JN: Can't think of when a Clearing Organization would not have an LEI. Max: Could have 20 different LI's established by 20 different registrars. JN: Should be all LEIs, but are not.

 

EK: Restriction on the swap leg is not there. Only property. Need to add it.

 

DN: Where is the effective date. EK: On the leg. DN: Because we have an effective date on the contract, it could also be on the swap. DN: Don't want t have interest rates at the swap level. JN: We don't want to follow mistakes of the Relational data base.

 

DN: We don’t want the FIBO-FND mistakes that MB made to continue here. Some of those conceptual abstractions need to be eliminated. DN: Start with product ne next week. JN: Trying to show how FIBO could be used as a data dictionary. Could not find interest rates in swaps. DN: It is there. JN did not begin with the right starting point. EK: All there, but not linked. She and DA are working on this. JN: Wants to show how to do this. JN asked No Magic.

DN: What do you want. JN: Just the term and definition. Then show more FIBO power.

 

ACTION: Elisa to give John a script for where to go and not go in Protege.

 

DN: Also more work on simple glossary infrastructure.

Decisions:

Action items

  • Elisa Kendall  give John a script for where to go and not go in Protege
  •