The Friday Topic Series was well attended, and provided a chance to discuss a wide variety of issues related to changes we are considering for the upcoming version. Videos for some of those meetings are on the website; others will be added. We encourage firms to watch these videos to understand the changes we are considering, and to provide your input and feedback.
Work on the release candidate continues, with both phase 1 (Planning & Outreach) and phase 2 (Scoping) approximately 80% complete, and phase 3 (Development) approximately 30% complete. The next steps for this project are to:
- finalize scope
- assess impact across RIXML standards
- complete schema development
- test and validate
- update RIXML documentation
- finalize and release production version
- a few XML experts to review the release candidate and make suggestions for best practices
- experts in XML Name Spaces, to help us decide if this would be a better way to manage and maintain our enumeration lists
- one or more people to lead the Interaction Standard release candidate stream (this standard leverages many of the tags in the Common Schema file, but we need someone familiar with the Interactions Standard to ensure that these changes are appropriate for that standard and to review the interactions-specific tags
- testing, testing, testing! When the release candidate is ready, it would be ideal if all RIXML member firms could test it and provide feedback.
- sample data: we like to provide sample RIXML records for a variety of use cases, ideally based on real records but anonymized by adjusting with generic author names, tickers, data, etc.
- assistance in reviewing the enumeration lists. It would be great if all firms could have their taxonomy experts, content integration teams, etc. look at our lists to determine what is missing, outdated, etc.
- assistance in reviewing the documentation. What is confusing? What is missing? What could we do to help ensure that all firms have a clear understanding of our standards and how to implement them in a consistent manner?
- improve the way we handle hierarchies for asset classes, industries, and ESG-related content
- address changes in how research is created, distributed, and consumed, such as allowing for multiple titles tailored for different audience types, component-level tagging, guidance for anticipated search terms, and enhanced capabilities for tagging audio, video, and interactive content – both for full research reports and for components within them
- adjust how and where entitlement data is provided
- enhance options for describing relationships between research items, interaction records, and non-research content
Sal also emphasized the fact that your input is critical – there was a set of tags we had proposed removing – until he heard from a firm that uses these tags. Please see the next section for specific areas we want your input on and ways you can help, but of course, we'd love to hear any other input you have.