• From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@s...>
• To: "Rick Jelliffe" <rjelliffe@a...>,"Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
• Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 09:51:17 -0500

BTW:  I'm not saying proper separation of concerns is a bad thing or
that moving the constraints to the schema is a bad thing.  In FpML it
quite likely is a good thing as far as visibility goes, but the question
was *will* it get traction and I assert that it depends on to whom it
makes a difference that makes a difference and precisely what the
difference is related to organizational goals.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-08-13/business/sns-rt-us-jpmorga
n-lawsuitbre87d00y-20120813_1_bond-issue-interest-rates-outstanding-bond
s

How should rates for swaps be enumerated if they are managed and
potentially litigated contract by contract?

len

• References:
  • Will XML Schema 1.1 get traction?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: Will XML Schema 1.1 get traction?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
  • RE: Will XML Schema 1.1 get traction?
    • From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@s...>