Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Rob Underwood (Deactivated)

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Former user (Deleted)

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

...

DRAFT - PENDING APPROVAL AT NEXT WG MEETING on 10/4

Table of Contents

Table of Contents
indent10px

...

Attendees

Role
NameOrganisation

Ben Gold

Wellington

Tom Schady

Green Key
Aaron WilliamsonFINOS
Adam LancasterTiick42
Johan SanderssonFact Set
Former user (Deleted)Refinitiv
Leslie SpiroTick42
Former user (Deleted)Refinitiv
Tosha EllisonFINOS
Rob Underwood (Deactivated)FINOS


Action Items

Tasks Identified and Assigned

  •  Task 1
    •  Subtask
    Present Use Cases at next FDC3 General Meeting (All)
  •  Page owners – add "page properties" module (All)

Overall Working Group Open Task List

Task report
labelsfdc3_uc_working_group


Decisions Made

  • <Decision>
  • <Decision>Use Case 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 accepted
  • Use Case 7 was rejected


TimeItemWhoNotes
2 minCommence Meeting & Select Scribe groupAaron Williamson volunteered to be scribe
4 minReview minutes from last meeting (9/6) and approvegroupGroup agreed by acclamation to defer voting on 9/6 votes until next meeting, at which time meeting minutes for 9/6 and 9/20 (these minutes) will be reviewed and presented for approval. Kat agreed to include links in the next email to the group.
3 minReviewing open action itemsgroupKat marked the open item related to voting as complete.
1 minHousekeeping: Board Update, Meetup, OSSFRob U

Ben Gold from Wellington introduced himself as a developer on the portfolio manager/investment side working on Wellington's integration with OpenFin. He said he'd just joined the group and would be working through the WG meeting notes to catch up.

Rob Underwood mentioned that PMC program updates are due Tuesday 10/4. He also encouraged attendees to register for the 10/4 NYC Open Source in Fintech Event Series and the 11/14-11/15 Open Source Strategy Forum in London.

10 minOverview of approved FDC3 voting processgroup

Standards Ratification Process

  • Saori discussed the overall FDC3 voting procedures approved at the previous PMC meeting. She encouraged members to read the rules themselves and ask any questions they had. She noted that since the use cases produced by this group were not "standards" they would not go to the FDC3 leadership for a vote, but would simply be presented at the monthly FDC3 general meeting upon their approval.
  • Kat asked how approved use cases would be marked and Saori suggested the original author should change the status flag on the use case upon acceptance by the WG.
  • Johan asked how to change the flag and Tom said that it would be via a macro that would be included in the template for use cases.
  • Rob suggested that when authors change the status flags, they include the date of ratification in the "What did you change?"
20 min

Next steps in use cases process

  • Confirm ownership
  • Presentation to PMC and other WGs

group

Voting Approvals

Use Case 1

  • Google Groups vote: All voted yes but Jonathan Teper, who voted to do "in review"

  • I think we have acceptance. Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 1 was accepted.

Use Case 2

  • Google Group: 5 people voted; everyone voted to accept

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 2 was accepted.

Use Case 3

  • Google Group: 5 people voted; everyone voted to accept

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 3 was accepted.

Use Case 4

  • 4 votes

    • 3 votes to approve

    • 1 in review – uncertainty for the workflow comment from Johan. "It's the end application that is doing the work; I'm not sure where the interop functionality comes in"

      • Leslie: This use case in talking about where/how to inject own credit checking system

    • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 4 was accepted.

Use Case 5

  • Google Group: 5 people voted; everyone voted to accept

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 5 was accepted.

Use Case 6

  • Leslie: Needs to also consider situation where the app is already running
  • Aaron: You might also set a date and action item for a 2nd vote to make it more likely to clearly reject/pass; or also create an expiration process
  • Saori moved to keep in review and use case 6 was kept in review.

Use Case 7

  • Google Group: 2 votes to reject, 1 to approve

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to reject t this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 7 was rejected.

Use Case 8

  • Google Group: 3 approve; 2 in review; 1 reject.

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to keep in review Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 8 was kept in review


Use Case 9

  • Google Group: 5 people voted; everyone voted to accept

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 9 was accepted.

Use Case 10

  • Google Group: 5 people voted; everyone voted to accept

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 10 was accepted

Use Case 13

  • Google Group: 3 approve; 1 in review.

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 13 was accepted

Use Case 14

  • Google Group: 2 approve; 2 in review.

  • at made motion by acclamation to keep in review Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 14 was kept in review

Use Case 15

  • Google Group: 5 people voted; everyone voted to accept

  • Kat made motion by acclamation to accept this use case. Hearing no objections the motion passed and use case 15 was accepted

Next Steps

  • These need to presented at the next general meeting


Use "announce@" to share use cases beyond FDC3?

15 minOverview of Use Case template to be used going forwardgroupTom

Tom showed where the use case template would be in confluence. See screeshot below:Image Added


Tom then walked through the specific sections of the use case. See following screen shot:
Image Added


Tom mentioned that Maurizio Pillitu has enabled a polling function to do voting on the use cases. 

Tom showed how a use cases table could be created, and could be used to process a larger list of use case items

  • "The table is a simple key value store"


Tom walked through the poll modal:

Image Added

Leslie: Can you add a reason for rejecting?

  • Tom: can't do that directly yet


Tom: the power comes from the page properties report – anything you'd like to search and sort on

Saori: Everyone needs to add the page properties macro.


Johan: Do we need to add an owner? or can we assume it's the author? What is the person drop off?


5 minAOBgroup

No other business to note. 

Leslie: Use Cases will be presented, and the other WGs will be told they need to respond.

  • Kat offered to draft something for the next stage in the process; next general meeting October 2