...
| Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 min | Convene & roll call | ||
| 10 min | Review action items from previous meetings | See above | |
| 30 min | API specification: technical approach and timeline | Former user (Deleted), Lynn Neir (Deactivated), Jonathan Christensen | The aim of this discussion is to: 1) agree on a technical approach to defining the API specification, based on the discussions that have taken place in the specification subgroup; 2) establish terms for cooperating with Symphony LLC; and 3) establish a timeline and milestones for defining the spec. |
| 10 min | Discuss proposed revised charter | Former user (Deleted) | Former user (Deleted) has proposed that the first provision of the draft updated charter be revised as follows: "The group will seek to define and standardize APIs required to integrate the Symphony HTML5 application into a desktop container, with a specific goal |
| 5 min | AOB & adjourn |
Attendees
| Name | Organisation |
|---|---|
Former user (Deleted) (chair) | Credit Suisse |
| Jonathan Christensen | Symphony LLC |
| Andrew Christie | Ipreo |
| Goldman Sachs | |
| ScottLogic | |
| Mark Hu | Citi |
| Brian Ingenito | Morgan Stanley |
| OpenFin | |
| Citadel | |
| Symphony LLC | |
| Symphony LLC | |
| Ed Sanders | JP Morgan Chase |
| FactSet | |
| Morgan Stanley | |
| HSBC | |
| Ryan Sharp | ChartIQ |
| Tick42 | |
| Symphony Software Foundation | |
| Symphony Software Foundation | |
| Symphony Software Foundation |
Meeting notes
James Turck: Going to ignore previous action items. The main item is API specification, approach and timeline. At the last WG meeting, there was a discussion about whether the approach we were taking to the specification was correct and whether we’d be driving to an answer quickly enough for the LLC to be able to use the spec. The topic was brought up again the board meeting, so the action I’d like to take is to agree, hopefully quickly, to the approach that we’re taking. It’s been suggested that instead of having a separate subgroup, we fold that into this one. So that’s the primary goal of this session. We also have the outstanding action of the revised charter, which I still intend to carve 10 minutes out at the end for. But first let’s try to agree on the approach and timeline, and hopefully get to some technical work.
...
- Lynn Neir (Deactivated): add new/in-progress API methods to list in Confluence
- Lynn Neir (Deactivated): add planned (but not in-progress) API methods to list in Confluence
- Former user (Deleted): revise proposed charter to clarify that group's priority is portability of Symphony to various containers, with portability of other apps being a secondary goal.
- Leslie Spiro: whip member participation to review & give feedback on proposed API spec
- All Members: review & provide feedback on draft API specification
Actions items from previous meetings
- Former user (Deleted): revise draft charter item 3 to focus WG's interoperability mission to desktop interop only.
- Former user (Deleted): work internally at DB to ready interbank interop project for presentation to WG
- Jonathan Christensen: add the existing Symphony Electron container backlog & roadmap to the WG Github project.
- Lawrence Miller (Deactivated): talk to JC regarding getting the Symphony front end development team engaged on the standard API work generally, and the notification API specifically.
- Colin Eberhardt (He/Him) would like to have a call with JC to discuss these topics
- Former user (Deleted): put a clear description in Confluence of what information and cooperation the Working Group needs from Symphony LLC to make progress.
- All: review and comment on Nick's description
- Former user (Deleted): bring the issue to the ESCo at next week's meeting
- Former user (Deleted) and Former user (Deleted): prepare a briefing for the April 19 board meeting
- Mazy Dar: propose revisions to the draft charter to narrow WG's mandate
- All: add agenda items to next meeting (standing action item)