- Dennis Wisnosky
- Jefferson Braswell
- Unknown User (tomdy)
- Jennifer Bond-Caswell
- Pete Rivett
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/FBC/issues/FBC-106?filter=allopenissues
5) Todays content discussion.
6) For next week.
20171016 FIBO FBC FCT
Overview of some issues with reasoning errors that were hiding...fallout from some stuff in Foundations and Business Entities. Since we are downstream from that, we are hit as well. This is not a problem that will go away quickly or easily. With an ever-growing set of ontologies, managed by an ever-growing set of committees.
Next up for us after this clean-up is in place: go through what is being added to SEC and FBC through the additional stuff generated from the FIBO - 2 effort. When we turn back to SEC: build out/review of Equity Instruments, Debt Foundations, Debt Instruments.
Quick update from Jeff Braswell and Richard Beatch on intersections/interactions with ISO 20022 semantic work. Quick overview of what, in SEC we will need to review once the current FBC update is done. The FBC update is critical path for the Dec 31 FIBO release/Dec OMG meeting.
Walk through of IRS trade field mapping spreadsheet from CFTC. Some of this is important for FBC, some are Derivative-specific, etc. Some of it may just be out of scope.
Jeff Braswell: Quick follow-up on TC68/SC9/WG1 semantics group seeking to express ISO 20022 conceptual business model semantically and use that as a hub to relate and map between multiple models which do overlap: the issue that David Frankel raised was more than the definition of 'securities' (for which FIBO could be used), but more the fact that the ISO 20022 conceptual business model *relationships* on concepts was not appropriate. Jeff Braswell: I agree that jurisdiction-specific / agency-specific qualified regulatory reporting data elements would be useful (which Elisa is calling 'Regulatory Reporting').
Jeff Braswell: As a separate ontology section. But isn't the goal not to define the concept of a regulatory report per se, but to provide context for regulator-specific requirements in their reports? That is a different exercise than mapping FIBO to regulatory reporting, which is more of a broader 'RegTech' excercise
- Dennis Wisnosky bring up the FIBO domain responsibility issue to the FLT