Thanks Peter. We have looked at transactions from the point of
view of derivatives contracts, building this around the
fundemantal concepts in the REA Ontology (Bill McCarthy, Michigan
State Uni). However we have not looked (yet) at other kinds of
transactions e.g. securities purchase and sale transactions,
which we will do some time soon. (01)
When we do, the basic building blocks for monetary transactions
are well covered in the ISO 20022 standard (used in SWIFT bank to
bank messaging), so there is no real need to try and rediscover
these. These are currently defined more at a message level, with
some corresponding logical data model content. (02)
The interesting news is that SWIFT, as the Registration Authority
for ISO 20022, are doing some promising work in raising the
content of their logical data models to a more semantic level. I
had an in depth meeting with them last week. They are following
an approach which is closer to SBVR than OWL or Common Logic,
i.e. defining commonly understood concepts in a way that is
understood by the relevant business community (speech community
and/or semantics community in SBVR), and then taking a more
axiom-based approach from those common concepts downwards. The
common concepts are similar to some of the things we have
developed at the EDM Council as archetypes (e.g. Contract). In
comparing the two models we have identified possible changes in
both, such that we can expect to see some clearer alignment in
the future. This alignment is in the securities space rather than
payment as such. (03)
Therefore when we come on to securities transactions we would
expect to take the more semantic new ISO 20022 terms as a
starting point. We will not be covering the basic payments space
itself, but I would hope that out of this we can get to a point
where ISO 20022 has a coherent semantic model for all the terms
in the payments space. This would likely be at version 2 of ISO
20022, which is some way down the line. First, I hope we can get
to a point where there is a common, formal semantics modeling
framework that can be proposed into ISO 20022 v2. (04)
All of which is a long way down the line. However, if anyone is
looking for canonical semantics for financial payments,
settlement, transactions etc. this is where one would look, I
suggest. (05)
Mike (06)
On 06/01/2011 16:02, Peter Yim wrote:
> You might want to refer to (if you haven't already) the "The EDM
> Council Semantics Repository" work. Mike Bennett, who is a key driver
> of that work is an active member here, and can probably answer some of
> the question you may have on that work.
>
> See: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_09_25
> and
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2009_Symposium#nid1VUY
>
> Regards. =ppy
> --
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Selcuk Bozdag<sbozdag@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi ontologs,
>>
>> I would like to get your ideas about modeling a financial
>> organization's (e.g. a bank) money transaction ontology using OWL
>> (1). Suppose that a bank wants to track the accounts of the customers
>> in order to determine anomalies, fraud issues or just to ensure that
>> everything is OK at the end of the day. I have come up with a solution
>> which caused a discussion among my colleagues mostly ended with a
>> disagreement. Right below I am giving only a clipped portion of the
>> draft ontology at a glance.
>>
>> The absolute classes(i.e. concepts) are Bank, Money, Customer and
>> Account. When it comes to represent a money transfer between two
>> accounts, I suggested to create another class named "MoneyTransfer" on
>> which one can create object properties such as transferDate, amount
>> etc. On the flip side, others put the MoneyTransfer class aside and
>> preferred to create an object property named "transfersMoney" which
>> has a domain and range of Account. However it is obvious that
>> transfersMoney property is just a relation between to individuals
>> representing none of the date and amount information.
>>
>> I would greatly appreciate if you could explain your point of view and
>> show me what the alternatives could possibly be. I also would be
>> thankful if you refer any other ontology regarding that issue.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Selcuk
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> (07)
--
Mike Bennett
Director
Hypercube Ltd.
89 Worship Street
London EC2A 2BF
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
www.hypercube.co.uk
Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068 (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
|