[ OVERVIEW ]          [ STRUCTURE/PARTICIPANTS ]          [ MDDL DOCUMENTS ]          [ LINKS ]
[ DISCUSSION ]             [ JOIN MAILING LIST ]             [ MEETING SCHEDULE ]          [ NEWS ]
 

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).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Copyright ©2001, The Software & Information Industry Association.
SIIA's Privacy Policy and Use Agreement.
All rights reserved.