CDM Technology Architecture WG - November 14th, 2024

[eteridvalishvili]

CDM Technology Architecture Working Group Minutes

Meeting Host: Chris Rayner, ISLA

Date

November 14th, 2023 - 9 am EST / 2 pm GMT

Untracked attendees

• Fullname, Affiliation, (optional) GitHub username

Meeting notices

• FINOS Project leads are responsible for observing the FINOS guidelines for running project meetings. Project maintainers can find additional resources in the FINOS Maintainers Cheatsheet.

• All participants in FINOS project meetings are subject to the LF Antitrust Policy, the FINOS Community Code of Conduct and all other FINOS policies.

• FINOS meetings involve participation by industry competitors, and it is the intention of FINOS and the Linux Foundation to conduct all of its activities in accordance with applicable antitrust and competition laws. It is therefore extremely important that attendees adhere to meeting agendas, and be aware of, and not participate in, any activities that are prohibited under applicable US state, federal or foreign antitrust and competition laws. Please contact legal@finos.org with any questions.

• FINOS project meetings may be recorded for use solely by the FINOS team for administration purposes. In very limited instances, and with explicit approval, recordings may be made more widely available.

Agenda

• Convene & roll call (5mins)
• Display FINOS Antitrust Policy summary slide
• Review Meeting Notices (see above)
• Review minutes of last meeting
  • CDM Technology Architecture WG - October 10th, 2024  #3165
• Topics
  • Serialization Design (20 mins) - @chrisisla
  • Reference Data review (10 mins) - @chrisisla
  • Extended Enums & Type Extension (20 mins) - @SimonCockx
• AOB
  • TAWG December meeting

Minutes & Discussion points

Discussion on Serialization

• The goals, principles and design were presented
• Question about when @data would be used
  • Further examples will be added to illustrate its usage
• Question about release version
  • Aiming for CDM V7 as this is a breaking change
  • This is likely to be end of Q2 next year
• The proposed timelines were presented
• Suggestions or alternatives with examples can be added to the Issue
• There were no objections raised with the timelines or process

Discussion on Reference Data

• The recommendation we put out earlier this year has proven to be restrictive
• It also generated a lot of questions
• There was also no funding available until recently
• To enable innovative solutions to be proposed we need to update the recommendation
  • Remove constraint about must be a Rune syntax enhancement
• Question about support for programming languages
  • Agreed any proposal should cater for Java, Python and JSON Schema
  • The recommendation will be updated to contain this
• Agreed that Dan, Brian and Chris would meet to make changes to recommendation

Discussion on Extending Enums

• Presentation of how enums in the CDM are currently being extended
• Proposal on how Choice could be used instead
• Question about Choice vs Union
  • Although Choice works it implies an 'either or'
  • Really what extend is doing is performing a union of lists
• Agreed cost/benefit of implementing new 'Union' syntax should be explored

Presentation of Type extensions

• Brief presentation of proposed changes to type extensions
• Ask is for participants to review the Rune issue and comment

Action Items

• Add further examples of using @data to the Serialization design - @chrisisla
• Update the Reference Data recommendation: - @chrisisla @brianlynn2 @dschwartznyc - NO LONGER REQD
  • Remove Rune syntax change requirement
  • Add requirement to support Java, Python and JSON Scheme code generation
  • Meeting between Chris, Dan and Brian to move this forward
• Analysis on costs/benefits of adding new Union operator to Rune - @SimonCockx
• Participants to please review the Rune issue on type extensions

Zoom info

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/99036410403?pwd=MXNINndYcEd0dTBUZERuYTFwRGpWZz09

Meeting ID: 990 3641 0403
Passcode: 745379
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adtpQBjgT9

[hugohills-regnosys]

For the last item by REGnosys (@minesh-s-patel / @SimonCockx), we are covering 2 topics within the 30 min slot:

• Fix overriding attributes - Allow restricting the type and cardinality of an attribute in a type extension rune-dsl#863
• Enum extensions - Extending.enums.pdf

[chrisisla]

Chris Rayner / ISLA

[SimonCockx]

Simon Cockx / REGnosys

[brianlynn2]

Brian Lynn / GEM for ISDA

[eteridvalishvili]

Eteri / FINOS

[dschwartznyc]

Dan Schwartz / FT Advisory

[llynhiavu]

Lyteck Lynhiavu / ISDA

[ahutusoru123]

Adrian Hutusoru / Fragmos Chain

[dshoneisda]

David Shone/ISDA

[hugohills-regnosys]

Hugo Hills / REGnosys

[manel-martos]

Manuel Martos / TradeHeader

[plamen-neykov]

Plamen Neykov / CLOUDRISK

[jgavronsky]

Jane / FINOS

[ADaleISLA]

Adrian Dale/ISLA

[SimonCockx]

@brianlynn2 @dschwartznyc Sorry we did not have the chance to discuss the nature of choice types any further - if time would have allowed it I would have been happy to do so. I would be very much interested in knowing more about what you meant with the difference between choice types and "union types". I have raised an issue on the DSL repository to continue this thread:
finos/rune-dsl#871, in which I've also clarified what I mean when I say "choice types are an implementation of tagged union types".