1. CEN WS XBRL Project. See our public working WIKI space at www.xbrlwiki.info
Header (CWA2) in XML for non-functional purposes (manifesto, preparing contractor, administrative details, and so on…).This include an extension of the Core Business Vocabulary http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/core_business/release/100
Filing indicators (current discussions among Supervisors). Topic described more or less as follows:
- Filing indicators are facts included as part of an instance document where the filer estates which tables are being reported. Filing indicators should not be part of the dictionary of concepts. They are just technical artefacts.
- Filing indicators being a “generic sub-element” of a tuple (or dimension) or a concept? Filing indicators must be first class citizens or generic values of a fact?
- Supervisors would need the (boolean) filing indicators to be accompanied by an indication of why a particular template was not filed, in order to distinguish between, for example, where an entire line of business is not conducted by an undertaking vs. where they feel they are not required to report as their level of business falls/fell below some proportionality threshold. Is the information related to proportionality, materiality, zealous filing… typically covered by foot-notes on filing indicators (any fact may be associated to one or more foot-notes)?
- If the filings indicators are defined using concepts (aka primary items), and considering than each concept is to be defined in the taxonomy, then each new filing indicator would result in a modification of the “content definition” of the taxonomy. However, if the filing indicators are defined using instantiations of repetitive structures (as tuples or dimensions), the “content definition” of the taxonomy is unaltered. Only the specific formulae for validation is to be updated. But this have no impact in the structure of data. This “golden rule” of isolation between “data structures” and “validations “ is inspired in the paradigm “Algorithms Plus Data Structures Equals Programs” of Niklaus Wirth
- Facts are used, defined at the template level. The template level is the one on which the legal requirement (including proportionality waivers) are based. From a business point of view, a template is the granularity level on which a number of business rules apply. Filler to express which subset of the requirement they are reporting for (this means that it is something that should be in the instance itself, and not only in the envelope). This subset can be rendered (e.g. as a summary or cover template). From this point of view, a change in the “filing indicators” is linked to a change in the business requirements (required granularity, or content), and so probably mandate an update of the taxonomy.
- What exactly is the (part of) business problem(s) to be solved: Controlling the execution of validations? Submissions follow-up/ monitoring reporting obligations? What is the required granularity for this control?
(comments welcomed. Topic to be closed soon)
2. EBA news.
CRD IV to be discussed in the European Parliament on Nov. 23rd, hopefully to be decided on Dec. 6th . From this point of time, about two or three months needed for final DPM and XBRL taxonomy.
XBRL Architecture document in last reviews. Final version to be approved on Dec. 14th, EBA XBRL subgroup meeting to be held on Bundesbank Frankfurt.
3. EIOPA news. No news
4. XBRL week in Frankfurt: 11-14 December.
LAST SEATS! See more at http://www.eurofiling.info/201212/
Volunteering Crew (v-crew) helping Bundesbank colleagues (lesson learnt from the XBRL week in Madrid): Sarah Feron, Pieter Maillard, Iñaki Vazquez, Javi Mora & Ignacio Boixo
5. AOB.
ATTENDEES
Andreas Weller (EBA)
Aitor Azcoaga (EIOPA)
Roland Hommes (Rhocon, NL)
Derek De Brandt (XBRL EU)
Joel Vicente (CoreFiling, UK)
Eduardo Gonzalez (Gonblan)
Emile Bartolé (CSSF LU)
Pieter Maillard (Aguilonius, BE)
Aftab Ahmad (The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway)
Pablo Navarro (Atos, ES)
Masatomo Goto (Fujitsu, UK)
Sarah Feron (Convista, ES)
Wladyslaw Krawiec (IFRS)
Grzegorz Backer (GPM Systemy, PL)
Hugh Wallis (IBM, CA)
Ignacio Boixo (Eurofiling coordinator)
APOLOGIES
Katrin Heinze (Eurofiling coordinator)