SEC-145 - Listed security is improperly inferred to be a listing #1245
Conversation
…isting which caused reasoning errors, corrected ticker symbol as identifying a listed security rather than listing, streamlined hierarchy for registered securities, and eliminated ambiguity in definitions Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <ekendall@thematix.com>
| </owl:Restriction> | ||
| </rdfs:subClassOf> | ||
| <rdfs:label>security registry entry</rdfs:label> | ||
| <skos:definition>record for a listed security in a securities repository</skos:definition> | ||
| <skos:definition>record for a security in a securities repository</skos:definition> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not sure that "repository" is the right word here - it does not store the securities in any way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
changed to registry
| @@ -433,7 +398,7 @@ | |||
| <rdfs:subClassOf> | |||
| <owl:Restriction> | |||
| <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&lcc-lr;identifies"/> | |||
| <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="&fibo-sec-sec-lst;Listing"/> | |||
| <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="&fibo-sec-sec-lst;ListedSecurity"/> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No is's more specific than this: it represents the offer from a specific Exchange: the actual Security is referenced only indirectly. ListedSecurity WAS the issued share (in the case of equities) which is available through multiple exchanges, and it may have a different ticker on each. I see you've changed the definition of ListedSecurity to be for a single exchange which could have a broader impact
| @@ -147,7 +149,7 @@ | |||
| </owl:Restriction> | |||
| </rdfs:subClassOf> | |||
| <rdfs:label>listed security</rdfs:label> | |||
| <skos:definition>registered security listed on one or more exchanges</skos:definition> | |||
| <skos:definition>registered security listed on some exchange</skos:definition> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks like a minor wording change but has a major impact. It in effect replaces what was Listing and so needs several of the latter's properties moved over e.g. a link to the IssuedSecurity that is listed, and the currency
| <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">listing</rdfs:label> | ||
| <skos:definition>registry entry for a security that provides information regarding the eligibility for making that security available for trading</skos:definition> | ||
| <skos:definition>registry entry for a security that is managed by an exchange and that provides registration information regarding the eligibility for making that security available for trading</skos:definition> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't see anything about "eligibility"
| <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">listing</rdfs:label> | ||
| <skos:definition>registry entry for a security that provides information regarding the eligibility for making that security available for trading</skos:definition> | ||
| <skos:definition>registry entry for a security that is managed by an exchange and that provides registration information regarding the eligibility for making that security available for trading</skos:definition> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we should be modeling pure data artifacts such as "registry entry" which will be specific to each Exchange and probably proprietary. All these properties are actually applicable to the Offering which was Listing and is now ListedSecurity. In other words I don't think we need separate classes.
| @@ -278,7 +268,7 @@ | |||
| <rdfs:label>has home exchange</rdfs:label> | |||
| <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&fibo-fbc-fct-mkt;Exchange"/> | |||
| <skos:definition>indicates the current exchange that is considered the primary trading venue for a security</skos:definition> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but what does it mean to be the "primary trading venue"?
| @@ -278,7 +268,7 @@ | |||
| <rdfs:label>has home exchange</rdfs:label> | |||
| <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&fibo-fbc-fct-mkt;Exchange"/> | |||
| <skos:definition>indicates the current exchange that is considered the primary trading venue for a security</skos:definition> | |||
| <fibo-fnd-utl-av:explanatoryNote>A security may have been originally listed on the Frankfort exchange, but its current home is the London Stock Exchange, for example.</fibo-fnd-utl-av:explanatoryNote> | |||
| <fibo-fnd-utl-av:explanatoryNote>A security may have been originally listed on the Frankfurt exchange, but its current home is the London Stock Exchange, for example.</fibo-fnd-utl-av:explanatoryNote> | |||
| <fibo-fnd-utl-av:synonym>has primary trading market</fibo-fnd-utl-av:synonym> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also "has primary trading venue"?
… definitions Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <ekendall@thematix.com>
… to say 'at least one' rather than 'one or more' per FCT discussion Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <ekendall@thematix.com>
…ht identify a listing rather than only a financial instrument, eliminated the notion of a preferred identifier for an exchange as unnecessary, per feedback Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall <ekendall@thematix.com>
|
See example file I just sent you to prove my point |
Signed-off-by: Elisa Kendall ekendall@thematix.com
Description
Eliminated confusion between listed security and listing which caused reasoning errors, corrected ticker symbol as identifying a listed security rather than listing, streamlined hierarchy for registered securities, and eliminated ambiguity in definitions
Fixes: #1244 / SEC-145
Checklist: