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.
Pete is concerned about proliferating individuals. EK says that for US banks this is necessary to identify jurisdictions AND Individuals. Pete says these could be identical concepts. Apply jurisdiction classes to individuals, Pete says. EK Contract law also has jurisdictions. Not just the geographical location. Pete Keep the class and have the class apply to the LCC object. EK asks Pete to provide the use case where what EK has does not work, or is not necessary.
Pete Keep the class definition, keep the state. The geographical location is the same as the Jurisdiction. EK This is true in some cases, but not in others. Pete apply the class FIBO jurisdiction to the state and there could be additional jurisdictions. EK to Pete prove to me that the reasoner will still work your way.
Pete We do not need to model services provided by registrars. Pete Need to eliminate clutter because there is too much information and it confuses users. EK In OWL a user can work with partial information. Does not need to look at all of the content. Pete Then we need documentation and exemplars that people can really use. Else, it seems that there is a huge amount of irrelevant information. EK to Pete Then make a list of those that should be eliminated. Pete IN come cases eliminating something completely makes fixing bugs irrelevant. EK There are some places where this could be done, especially in BE. There are editorial notes that are irrelevant. There are some reasoning bugs that should be fixed.
Pete Need some changes to make the level 2 GLEIF work. EK Yes it is a high priority use case. EK The spreadsheet in the meeting notes shows the precise mapping.
Pete If we did jurisdiction my way then Column F could be eliminated. EK Maybe, but there could be the need to say the State of CA and the USA. Pete the standard for the registration authority in the USA is by state. EK From the GLIEF, the perspective is the State. But, sometimes, it is from the County. For example a Sole Proprietorship.
Pete Shouldn't there be a unique individual for each entity category. Do this like the Smart Stream example. EK It is sort of duplicative. Pete Not if we follow the LEI. If we do that we can infer the relationship.
EK to Pete Pls review the spreadsheet. And, look at the Most recent Pull Request. Spent hours getting the mapping done. Need to look at the BE relationships and see what is wrong. All Level 1 stuff is believed to be in. Now needs Level 2.
Pete The word transliterating is not right. EK points to places where this is exactly used. It is the correct word. Pete Encapsulate the data type in the name of the property. EK Don't like it but will look at it. Can't XML Lang in OWL. Need a plain literal. Pete LCC has some Language strings. EK If it does, that is wrong. Maybe with a type literal, we could use XML Lang.
EK Jeff B says that all of the GLIEF information is required. EK did not agree, but taking Jeff B word for it. Jeff is on the committees.
Pete to EK Do you have individuals that this was tested with? There are some. Do need to create more, especially for the SDR work. Wells and SS both want this. EK will add. Nothing that exists fails, just takes a long time to run.
Pete is registration authority in? There are 3 different kind of registration authorities. EK to review. Pete need an individual for the identifier. EK Yes.
EK There some errors in the GLEIF registration authorities that she will report.
Pete Should FIBO expect there to always be a transliterated name n ASCII. EK Do not thinks so. It is not in GLEIF. Pete, but that means that people need to look at 2 properties. Should always populate the ASCII name and report this back to GLEIF. EK Let's ask people like Jeff B to come up with a use case for that. EK will give Pete some individuals to test.
EK looks at how Bloomberg handles this. https://lei.bloomberg.com/leis/view/549300XGVYCP71W4BP27
Spreadsheet containing mapping from FIBO FBC to GLEIF LEI-CDF v2.1 Level 1 content is available here -