2015-11-05 LOAN FCT Meeting notes

Date

05 Nov 2015

Attendees

Lynn Calahan [X] (Unlicensed)

Agenda

Review of connections to the upper ontology for Loan
Begin review of HMDA material and concepts for HMDA Use Case
Link to updated ontology in OWL:

Loan Ontology in OWL

Proceedings

20151105 FIBO-Loans FCT

Jeff has done his homework. See file list called ACTUS Financial Contract classes, type and example. ACTUS has the contract cash flow structure types, the places the properties are used and their definitions. A subset of these is the Loan types. Will look today at the work Michael has done on lining the Loans concepts to the relevant concepts in the Upper Ontology. Will also look at the HMDA mappings .

Announcements: We continue to get closer to a standard format on the wiki spaces. There is a link to the How_To document on the front page of each Wiki, which is the document with the screen shots about how to do stuff. Ignore the calendar widget for now.

Slide 9 Understand the mappings to the upper ontology, make sure they are appropriate. New final HMDA rule. Review changes we need in the ontology to support this. Roadmap: still on track to create that first cut of the core Loans framework as a dry run.

JIRA LOAN22 hasPart relationship. The requirement is to make the relationship more specific than the extensive use of hasPart. MU has made a start to this, will have as much as possible by next meeting. Will need guidance from the group on some of the appropriate meanings we need, where hasPart is a placeholder. Will be top of the agenda next week.

JIRA LOAN19 RealEstate. Need to look at real estate property as something separate from its value as an asset or a liability, i.e. the real thing that is real estate versus real estate in the role of being an assset. Open in progress.

JIRA LOAN26 review HMDA mapping. Will look at this today.

JIRA LOAN21 tease out something on loan concepts and their organization. Lynn has tightened up the description to be more specific, use it as our roadmap for the organization of the concepts, review once we look at the upper ontology links. Assigned to Michael Uschold.

JIRA LOAN15 seems generic "continue working on the ontology"? LC: This is about the process of getting all the diagrams together for the submittal. So this remains open.

JIRA LOAN25 is an action for Lynn to update the schema.org use case.

JIRA LOAN18 Provisional loans URIs to upper ontology URIs today's agenda.

JIRA LOAN17 JB on perpetual notes. Has decided this is not as relevant. Perpetual Loans exist but not the same as perpetual loan. Resolved as not needed. The stuff from Jeff action reported on at the start of this meeting is not covered by a JIRA issue. See File List in the Loan wiki. ATUS contract types. We can do a tour of this at the next meeting on the 19^th. ACTUS should be looked at by the overall FBC and Debt Common Terms as well as the Debt terms.

Connection to Upper Ontology - See MU slides. Sometimes there is a concept that matches, e.g. Agreement. Other times we need to get the FND FCT to add needed concepts. Temp terms added in Loans to migrated to FND or FBC as needed. Slide 3 has long list of classes that were mapped. Asset in FND defines something that is actually owned. Being a superclass of real estate implies this would be real estate that is owned and used as an asset. RealEstate is given as a subclass of Asset in Ownership which is real estate being owned by someone. Note that the word Asset is used in two entirely separate ways. There is also EconomicResource, in FND, which is a 3rd concept again. Mike Bennett: The word Asset is used to mean any one of several things: 1. a thing in itself, which people often use the word Asset for in their context. 2. A thing which someone actually owns it has an owner. 3. An economic resource something that can be the subject of a transaction, contract, commitment and so on. 4. The Asset entry in a double entry book keeping system. Mike Bennett: An Economic Resource has value (someone might want it); an Asset is actually owned by some owner. Most of what we are interested in is EconomicResource. Economic Resource is in Red FIBO and would need to be brought forward by one of these FCTs. Example: RealEstate a house with doors and windows and an address is an independent thring. If someone owns it, it is their asset (they own it). If they want to sell it, it is an economic resource in the context of the financial system. Propose we map RealEstate to Economic resource, no objections but make sure that the properties of a building in and of itself are properties of the corresponding independent thing that is in the role of an economic resource. These other stages are contextual to the owner, the market and so on. If something is going to be used as collateral then it has to be an Asset. LC not sure that is always going to be the case. The characteristics of that property are described independently of and before it is an asset or a piece of collateral. Properties of the contextual things (economic resource, collateral, asset) should only be the properties that relate in that context, e.g. its current valuation and who valued it.

Amount of Money straight forward Mapped to the relevant ND concept. There are two concepts with a number and a currency, and we need to be clear in Loans about which one of the two we are using. These would typically be the range of one or another property depending if they are notional (abstract) or actual concrete money. What about Fees? These look like a specification of an amount of money, but they get paid as actual money. The distinction may cause problems in some instances. Max suggests we consider valuations in terms of a notional trade rather than an actual money amount. How about credit limits especially ones with no fixed credit limit. Max sees no difference between money amount as a resource parcel and a monetary amount as a kind of measure To properly define a valuation we need to define the notional trade in question. For example some fees due, are written down as an amount e.g. $4000. This is a commitment to pay in the future rather than a monetary amount. Raise an issue on FND for Money Amount versus Monetary Amount. These are in Green FIBO and the loose usage seems simple enough up to now, but subsequent work n Quantities might give us something more precise around valuations. MU can make the changes later once this is resolved.

Financial Product: There is Product in FND, and FinancialProduct in FBC, for financial products, of which a Loan Product would be a kind. How does the product relate to the instrument"? Product is the market concept, and is what is offered. Instrument is the actual contract. Product is something that has been proposed from what is possible to offer. The instrument is what is made. Product identifier would relate to the catalog that identifies what is offered but is not the same as the actual underlying financial instrument. All agree.

Classifier: MU has something calley Category. Something that is used to categorize things. FIBO has a thing called Classifier which seems to be the same thing (this is in one of the recent additions to FIBO from Elisa and is not in red FIBO, but seems reasonable). For example Loan Category e.g. FHA Loan, Conforming Loan, Non conforming Loan and so on. This is something used to classify something, in this case - type of loan, type of construction and so on. (error in the model has ConstructionType showing the contents of LoanType) and vice versa. How this is used makes sense and there are a lot in HMDA and elsewhere in FIBO. A classifier is just an attribute that can be used to classify. Or is it? More of a tag or keyword, not literally an attribute. Can a classifier have more than 1 to 1 correspondence? Yes, a loan can be classified under more than one scheme. Based on e.g. the nature of the borrower, of the loan purpose and so on. Is this always in each list, a mutually exclusive list? Can multiple values in the same list be true? Actually we should change such lists to make sure that they do not contain multiple semantics. It should not be "required" that we have lists in FIBO which are covering more than one aspect of things being classified. These should ultimately converge on the classification hierarchy itself which is the heart of the ontology itself. We should recognize that there are multiple facets by which things can be classified. Is this the right thing to use? Yes. doesn't much matter anyway.

Document: See FND JIRA issue. We do actually have Document so we might be able to close that in Foundations to be confirmed. Then, when we talk about closing document, etc. are we sure this is compatible with the FIBO concept? A broader term is artifact. The definition is suspect. Document should be the most general class of thing that is a document. Also Legal document some of these things might rightly belong under LegalDocument anyway. For example ClosingDocument is a legal document. Credit Report is not a legal document. It's a report. What is the test of a legal document? The test is that it is a document that is recognized by, stipulated by or required by courts. Loan Application is a kind of Application, is that a Legal Document. They can be commitments. Has a thing about its accuracy. Does it fit under the definition of Legal Document? To clarify this we would have to distinguish between documents that required by a court, docs allowed by a court, docs that can be used in evidence, docs that can be produced by a court and so on. Do we really need a classification of LegalDocument at all? Legal Document seems to be used for licenses and things. What about Document is it something that can or does change or something that is a snapshot at a point in time. Information documenting a point in time. do we need both? Should we distinguish them? Or is Document a representation of the underlying data i.e. the physical evidence of something . The contract is the thing with legal force and the physical document with words and lines is the physical evidence of that stuff. FND to look at these nuances and close out with simplest possible model that works. An XML file specification for data is a kind of information artifact, and the words "Document: gets used for it. Our current definition of Document is too naive to cover all these requirements. Document will be an archetype so we will get the definition right. Application is one of the things we didn't have and needed. See the OWL file.

Application versus Application document. Application as a request an occurrence of something that happens where someone requests something . Punt the behavioral aspect and focus on Application Document which is the evidence like thing we are interested in. Do others agree or should we also model other things like the behavior? No!

PosstalAddress needs renamed to PropertyAddress. Postal Address may include a PO Box whereas a property address does not. Probably looking for Property Address or Physical Address here. The concept labeled PostalAddress in Foundations was mislabeled as it really meant to be a physical delivery address. The physical address of a piece of land, is not somewhere where post can be delivered to. Address as an index to a location, is also controlled by someone e.g. whoever gets the letters there, such as the post office. So PhysicalAddress needs to include the location of something without reference to letters being delivered there. Often specified as lot number but could also be a street and house number. FND addresses some fine tuning to come, but the concepts we needed here will be included e.g. Property Address where you need to talk about the address of the property independent of the address for delivery of stuff. The physical location exists in FIBO anyway. Sometimes the same place can be addressed in several different ways. Applies to houses and also to network nodes. Propose we just use Address. (deferred)

HMDA Analysis slide 29 of Michael's deck gives the items added for the HMDA analysis extensive analysis by Lynn. This is still only partial analysis . There are different kinds of loan contracts (another classification facet. Classifier s as we saw earlier. Also ready to add: Payment schedule (what is supposed to happen) versus the actual payment record. We should talk about what it means to be each of these, e.g. under Loan Contracts types. Also additional and modified data points section of HMDA which gets into the loans parameters themselves. There is a loan application process underlying all this, and different types of loans will follow different processes (similar to what we saw with different debt instrument types). Process is out of scope.

Lynn will be grouping the data and the concepts into groups of like things so we are not all over the map. See also thing added by Lenss to the meeting wiki.

Decisions

Deferred any address decisions at this time.

Action items

Mike Bennett Investigate Monetary Amount in FND.

Error rendering macro 'jira' : Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

Mike Bennett
JIRA LOAN20 manner of ownership. See additional detail added about what they mean by that. Talk of property estate type i.e. the manner in which title is held. Suggest that MU look at this for the next meeting. MU to also look at the current in flight work on Ownership in FND. MB to sent MU and Lynn a link to this work and link the JIRA issue to the ones in FND.