1) Review of generic model before evaluation by SMEs


Present: Elesa Kendall, Max Gillmore, Pete Rivett, Bobbin Teagarden, Rob Nehmer, Mike Bennett, Mike Atkin, Cory Casanave

3:10 PM: CC - implemented suggested changes from PR (eliminated ratings statements, changed some of the terms/rating performer)

3:11 PM: MB - rated entity (stereotyped as "anything") - linked to OWL "thing"

3:13 PM: The term "rated entity" means the "thing" being rated.  

3:14 PM: Group would like to see the requirements for this ontology (competency questions) as a means to test the efficacy of the output

3:18 PM: Formal statement = the opinion associated with the rating (changed "formal statement" to "opinion")

3:27 PM: "Rating agency" - how is this defined?  Questioning the term because the entity issuing the rating might not be an agent (i.e. acting on behalf of someone else).  Consider the term "rating party" or "rating issuer" or "rating provider"

3:38 PM: The term "opinion" causes consternation (judgement, assessment)

3:53 PM: Consider "assessment output" or "assessment outcome"

3:55 PM: Back to "opinion" - broader sense

3:59 PM: From S&P: A Standard & Poor's issue credit rating is a forward-looking opinion about the creditworthiness of an obligor with respect to a specific financial obligation, a specific class of financial obligations, or a specific financial program (including ratings on medium-term note programs and commercial paper programs). It takes into consideration the Standard & Poor's creditworthiness of guarantors, insurers, or other forms of credit enhancement on the obligation and takes into account the currency in which the obligation is denominated. The opinion reflects Standard & Poor's view of the obligor's capacity and willingness to meet its financial commitments as they come due, and may assess terms, such as collateral security and subordination, which could affect ultimate payment in the event of default.

4:02 PM: Date - see "combined date time" (hte new datatype that defines multiple concepts).  Date is problematic because there are lots of dates (date of issuance, date of coverage, date of report/outcome, effective date)

4:05 PM: For date - there is an "issued as of" and "effective as of" (a concept of time) to be included in the ratings ontology

4:08 PM: Consider "is issued on" and "is effective on" (or "when issued" and "when effective")


Action items