Market
Data Definition Language (MDDL) Tech
Committee Apr. 5 Conference Call on Design Goals Report
April 11, 2001 Participants Sadakah
Bandu (Lehman), Mike Benveniste (Fidelity), Tony Coates (Reuters), Ike Copperman
(MGIT), James Hartley (Bridge), Alex Kogon (Bear Stearns), Jugal Poddar (Lehman),
Mark Rayman (Merrill Lynch), Rich Robinson (Bank of New York), Warren Sample (Multex),
Koichi Shiroma (Bloomberg), Tony Zhang (FinPortfolio) Meeting
Objectives The
primary purpose of the meeting was to review and decide on the strategy to address
the core design elements of MDDL. Also included was a discussion on documentation
requirements for initial release of the specification. Hierarchical
versus Flat Structure Outcome:
The architectural approach of MDDL will tend
toward a hierarchical structure (defined to ensure that the hierarchy can be used
in a redundant form). The Technical Committee will need to verify that a hierarchical
structure will meet the data logic requirements of the Vocabulary Committee. DTD
versus Schema Outcome:
The Technical Committee is recommending a
dual approach (map to both schema and DTD) as the technical mechanism. The primary
approach will be schema since it provides for more functionality in the long run,
is easier to extend and because the DTD can be derived from the schema. However,
MDDL must stay DTD compatible. Some concern was expressed about the availability
of tools (i.e. validator and authoring) to generate the schema. Conformance
and Compliance Outcome:
The full discussion on conformance and compliance
was tabled until a later date. The Committee agrees on the importance of producing
tools to validate vendor compliance to MDDL rules and to validate additional data
not covered by the Schema/DTD. It's not likely that MDDL will produce compliance/validity
software by the June deadline. Elements
versus Attributes Outcome:
The consensus of the Technical Committee
was on an element view of the world. All fields will be elements (easier to attach
additional information and easier to add meta data to elements). Some concern
was expressed about size. Extensibility/Name
Space Outcome:
The Technical Committee concludes that (if
implemented correctly) name space would allow us to extend our specification using
other XML specifications (and vice versa). MDDL will provide a mechanism for vendor
extensibility. Request/Response
Mechanism Outcome:
The Technical Committee is in agreement that
MDDL must specify the request/response mechanism. While essential, the request/response
mechanism will not likely be part of the initial release (i.e. MDDL is a data
format/representation system with request/response being a wrapper). The participants
want to make sure this strategy is acceptable to user firms and the MDDL Steering
Committee. Documentation Outcome:
Documentation components will be published as separate, stand-alone documents.
For the initial release, the required documentation elements are: DTD, schema,
data dictionary, vocabulary, design goals position papers and examples of final
data content. Publication Outcome:
Nothing will be published to the MDDL web
site unless it's approved. The "Editors-in-Chief"for the Technical Committee
are Tony Coates (Reuters) and James Hartley (Bridge). All discussion documents
and draft position papers should be published and distributed through e-groups.
To register for MDDL e-groups, connect to http://www.groups.yahoo.com.
Register with Yahoo. Search for MDDL. Register for the appropriate groups. Next
Meeting The
next meeting of the Technical Committee is Thursday, April 19 from 2:00pm -
6:00pm at Multex (100 William Street, 7th Floor, Board Room). RSVP your participation
via return e-mail to get through security. The
focus of the April 19 meeting is to begin the detail work on the Schema/DTD, evaluate
the content of the position paper(s), work through the user case examples and
begin to structure the documentation. To facilitate that process, all members
are asked to craft their views on the issues outlined in this report and post
them to e-groups (Technical Committee). The following people agreed to take the
lead on the indicated areas: Schema/DTD (Tony Coates), Elements/Attributes (Tony
Zhang), Request/Response (Jugal Poddar) Drafts
on the design goal approaches are due THURSDAY, APRIL 12 (in the AM).
|