Table of Contents

Date

10 Jan 2018

Actions items

Add new action items here.

Agenda

Meeting notes

JS: Any update on your action item on CDS objects Hershal?

HS: I did follow up and the team is working on a lot of MIFID II-related stuff and aren’t able to turn their attention to it. So it might make sense to bring this back up when the team’s able to turn to it.

JS: Ok, I’ll tick this box and you can follow up as there’s progress. Another item was for me to follow up with Symphony product management because we had a discussion about different wants and needs regarding the Security object. I haven’t managed to do that, but let’s make that an action item for me to get someone from Symphony to speak on how securities are handled on Symphony and how that relates to the proposed standard.

We had a big debate last time over whether the object should contain information to be used for presentation so that the object is more useful as-is to the user. Bruce thinks that’s bloating, that people who want more information should install a renderer that goes and gets this information base on the ISIN.

MB: So by default would Symphony send just the ticker, or CUSIP and ISIN as well?

JS: Symphony doesn’t want to send anything at all. When they start typing a security, they get a lookup where they can choose the right security, which includes an object containing all of this information. Then when the user receives the object, we’d like to be able to display the extra information in a hovercard about the security.

MB: But Symphony doesn’t want to keep that cross-reference information

JS: That’s the message I’ve heard so far.

HS: What is their specific concern?

AW: I think Bruce’s concern was primarily that, once you include additional information, it could end up conflicting with the essential information (i.e. the security IDs) and users could see one thing in the security’s longname while the underlying ID represented a different security.

But I thought he was only concerned with shortname, longname, localname, and country, not about the multiple IDs.

JS: That’s right. And to show you, Hershal and Matthew, I’m thinking of how the security is presented in Symphony.

HS: So what I think you’re suggesting is taking the object and adding more information to the hovercard presented to the user.

JS: Right. So we built a security selector with Symphony, where you can select a security with type-ahead, and it includes only the IDs. I want to include this other information so the hovercard can display useful information without a link to a market data app.

AW: Could you deal with Bruce’s concerns by only accepting extra data from trusted sources, or only using it if there’s no market data lookup available?

JS: Yes, but one key issue is, will the product team build it or just let integrators create their own hovercards? I can make these for FactSet users, but I think it’s more useful if this information is available out of the box.

So the question now is, if we remove these items now and standardize, what hurdles do we have to clear to get this considered for a future version?

Should we go ahead and standardize without the additional information?

AW: It makes sense to standardize on what’s available now. It might be easier to have the conversation on the additional items once people have been using the object and see how many users would benefit from the extra information.

JS: Okay. So moving on to the country object, there was agreement previously that we should stick with alpha-2 rather than allowing both -2 and -3.

MB: Using ISO, I assume.

JS: Exactly. And as a standard not allowing for other forms.

HS: I tend to agree.

JS: Ok, so I’ll put the country object to a vote as well. And maybe get another set of lightbulbs.

Anything you are doing, Hershal and Prashant, that bears on standard objects?

PD: Nothing at the moment, but maybe later in the year.

HS: I’d be interested in seeing if we can leverage the ISO standard for the FX flows for IOI. We’re fleshing some of that out and hopefully we’ll be able to put some of that forward later in the year.

JS: Sounds good.

AW: Matthew, what are you doing at S&P that would benefit from standard objects.

MB: Not really, my interest is more from a CUSIP perspective.

JS: Do you have any discussions with Symphony on providing that dataset to them as an organization and therefore to all their users.

MB: No, and that’s why I was asking. As long as they’re a pass-through for CUSIP information, that’s fine, but once they start building a database we need to talk more.

Attendees