<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>fpml-issues at Yahoo! Groups</title>
    <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/</link>
    <description>A public archive of comments received on the FpML technical reports</description>

    <item>
      <title>Making Scheme Attributes #REQUIRED - JPMorgan dissent</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2002 16:18:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>brian.lynn@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/20</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/20</guid>
      <description>In section 7 of the April 17 WD of FpML 3.0, there was a proposed change to the use of scheme defaults: Here is the text of the proposal: Quote: &quot;The FpML</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: [fpml-irdprod] FpML 2.0 - Proposal To Move To Recommendation</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jun 2002 13:33:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Addison, Andrew (London)</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/19</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/19</guid>
      <description>Hi, Further to Guys mail, we in Merrill Lynch have implemented a SwapsWire feed.  The core part (the translator) is currently being used for some simple trade</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: [fpml-irdprod] FpML 2.0 - Proposal To Move To Recommendation</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2002 09:28:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Guy Gurden</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/18</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/18</guid>
      <description>Steven, At SwapsWire we are using the FpML 1.0 Recommendation and components from FpML 2.0.  We currently limit ourselves to the Swap product but are making</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FpML 2 Minor Points</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2002 09:07:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>James Battle</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/17</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/17</guid>
      <description>Some additional points for FpML 2.0 Rec. 1) In the FpML 3 Draft, within the rollConventionScheme the name of the entry IMMCAD has changed to CADIMM.  If this</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Minor errors in example trades</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:24:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>steven.lord@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/16</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/16</guid>
      <description>Thanks for this.   I will update the errata list for the error in example 17. The others have already been identified and are included in the errata list.   </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Minor errors in example trades</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:39:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>James  Battle</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/15</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/15</guid>
      <description>I have noticed the following (minor) errors in the example trades in the LCWD: - In example 17, the calculationAgentParty is given as NonExerciseingParty</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Brief Comments on FpML 2.0 spec</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:50:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>nic.fulton@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/14</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/14</guid>
      <description>FpML, I have quicky glanced at the spec for FpML 2.0. I have skipped the sections on the actual definition (which I am sure mean lots more to others), but</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FpML 2.0 Last Call Working Draft published</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:04:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>steven.lord@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/13</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/13</guid>
      <description>FpML.org has published FpML 2.0 Last Call Working Draft. This version incorporates feedback on the FpML 2.0 Working Draft 17th October 2001. Comments should be</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Updated FpML 2.0 Working Draft Published</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:49:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>steven.lord@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/12</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/12</guid>
      <description>FpML.org has published an updated FpML Version 2.0 Working Draft. This version incorporates feedback on the FpML 2.0 Working Draft 28th August 2001. It is</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FW: FpML2 specification - comments</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2001 13:39:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>steven.lord@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/11</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/11</guid>
      <description>... From: Lord, Steven Sent: 24 September 2001 11:01 To: Paul.Newton Subject: RE: FpML2 specification - comments Hi, 1. FpML_ExerciseFee and</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FpML 2.0 Working Draft: Now Available</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:31:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>bryan.thal@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/10</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/10</guid>
      <description>Please see below a note from Steven Lord, Chair of the Interest Rate Product Working Group, regarding the publication of the FpML Version ... FpML.org has</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Incorrect Scheme URI in FpML 1.0 Recommendation</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:40:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Guy Gurden</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/9</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/9</guid>
      <description>The Scheme URI for the Negative Interest Rate Treatment Scheme listed in Section 8.2.12 of the FpML 1.0 Recommendation specification is incorrect.  The correct</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Updates to FpML 1.0 Trial Recommendation</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2001 16:56:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Guy Gurden</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/8</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/8</guid>
      <description>This note documents changes introduced between FpML Version 1.0 Trial Recommendation 25 September 2000 ( http://www.fpml.org/spec/2000/tr-fpml-1-0-2000-09-25)</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FpML Architecture 1.0 Spec - Revisions to Trial Recommendation</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2001 21:56:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Guy Gurden</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/7</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/7</guid>
      <description>This e-mail outlines the changes introduced between: FpML Architecture Version 1.0 Trial Recommendation 25 September 2000 ( </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FpML Version 1.0 - Trial Recommendation, 25 September 2000</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2000 15:13:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Max_Gillmore@...</dc:creator>
      <link>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/6</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fpml-issues/message/6</guid>
      <description>The National has been reviewing the FpML Trial Recommendation with a view to the recommended standard and to extend the standard to meet additional </description>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
<!-- wr3.grp.scd.yahoo.com uncompressed/chunked Sat Aug 30 09:11:25 PDT 2008 -->
