Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add additionalInfo and additionalUri properties to ProductRateTier #107

Closed
anzbankau opened this issue Jan 30, 2020 · 5 comments
Closed

Comments

@anzbankau
Copy link

Description

The additionalInfo and additionalInfoUri properties are useful in many places in many schema in the data standards. They would also be useful in the ProductRateTier schema to describe the rate tier. This was really just an oversight in the original rate tiering proposal.

In their absence, ANZ has had to use the additionalInfo and additionalInfoUri properties in the applicabilityConditions sub-object to describe the tier, when its real purpose is to provide conditions additional to those codified in the generic ProductRateTier structure. See the example below.

Area Affected

Endpoint: Get Product Detail
Schema: ProductRateTier

Change Proposed

Add additionalInfo and additionalInfoUri as a new optional properties to the ProductRateTier schema. The description should be consistent with additionalInfo and additionalInfoUri properties elsewhere i.e.:

additionalInfo: Display text providing more information on the rate tier
additionalInfoUri: Link to a web page with more information on this rate tier

Impact

As optional new properties, neither data providers or data recipients would be affected, but may include them to provide descriptive information. ANZ will move the additionalInfo and additionalInfo properties in the applicabilityConditions sub-object into the ProductRateTier object and remove the applicabilityConditions sub-object. See below for an example.

Current Response (example data only)

	"lendingRates": [
		{
			"lendingRateType": "VARIABLE",
			"rate": "0.0400",
			"comparisonRate": "0.0440",
			"applicationFrequency": "P1M",
			"interestPaymentDue": "IN_ARREARS",
			"additionalInfo": "Loan amount of $250,000 - $499,999, borrowing 80% or less of the property value",
			"additionalInfoUri": "...",
			"tiers": [
				{
					"name": "Amount",
					"unitOfMeasure": "DOLLAR",
					"minimumValue": 150000,
					"maximumValue": 249999,
					"rateApplicationMethod": "WHOLE_BALANCE",
					"applicabilityConditions": {
						"additionalInfo": "Total mortgage lending amount between $150,000 and $249,999",
						"additionalInfoUri": "..."
					}
				},
				{
					"name": "Loan-to-Value Ratio",
					"unitOfMeasure": "PERCENT",
					"minimumValue": 0,
					"maximumValue": 80,
					"rateApplicationMethod": "WHOLE_BALANCE",
					"applicabilityConditions": {
						"additionalInfo": "Borrowing up to 80% of the property value",
						"additionalInfoUri": "..."
					}
				}
			]
                 }
            ]

Proposed Response

	"lendingRates": [
		{
			"lendingRateType": "VARIABLE",
			"rate": "0.0400",
			"comparisonRate": "0.0440",
			"applicationFrequency": "P1M",
			"interestPaymentDue": "IN_ARREARS",
			"additionalInfo": "Loan amount of $250,000 - $499,999, borrowing 80% or less of the property value",
			"additionalInfoUri": "...",
			"tiers": [
				{
					"name": "Amount",
					"unitOfMeasure": "DOLLAR",
					"minimumValue": 150000,
					"maximumValue": 249999,
					"rateApplicationMethod": "WHOLE_BALANCE",
					"additionalInfo": "Total mortgage lending amount between $150,000 and $249,999",
					"additionalInfoUri": "..."
				},
				{
					"name": "Loan-to-Value Ratio",
					"unitOfMeasure": "PERCENT",
					"minimumValue": 0,
					"maximumValue": 80,
					"rateApplicationMethod": "WHOLE_BALANCE",
					"additionalInfo": "Borrowing up to 80% of the property value",
					"additionalInfoUri": "..."
				}
			]
                  }
            ]
@perlboy
Copy link

perlboy commented Feb 1, 2020

@anzbankau Probably the only concern I have with adding additionalInfo is what happens if the description does not match the tier attributes? Other than describing the tier components as text (which could be generated by the recipient anyway?) what purpose does additionalInfo serve?

The addition of applicationInfoUri seems reasonable although if it's a link to a PDF it would need to include anchors of some sort or it will be endlessly repeated per rate?

@CDR-API-Stream
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks @anzbankau and @perlboy. Now that v1.2.0 of the standards has been issued, we are reviewing our backlog for the next iteration. We will review and consult with the community on our backlog in the next fortnight.

Equally, data holders are within their right to define non-breaking extensions to the standards where a data holder sees benefit under the extensibility model.

@CDR-API-Stream CDR-API-Stream added this to Full Backlog in Data Standards Maintenance via automation Feb 3, 2020
@CDR-API-Stream CDR-API-Stream moved this from Full Backlog to Iteration Candidates in Data Standards Maintenance Feb 10, 2020
@CDR-API-Stream
Copy link
Collaborator

This change is supported to BankingProductRateTier. additionalInfo and additionalInfoUri will be included as optional attributes.

This will be incorporated into v1.3.0 (based off Maintenance Iteration #2). The change would be non-breaking and have a future dated obligation of July 2020 inline with the PRD Get Products V2 dates.

@CDR-API-Stream CDR-API-Stream moved this from Iteration Candidates to In progress in Data Standards Maintenance Mar 4, 2020
@perlboy
Copy link

perlboy commented Mar 4, 2020

Is this intended to be a V2 or V3 payload? We have a number of active deployments in progress and would prefer if version numbers were incremented for each minor release updating a payload as this allows for explicit binding of version compatibility (ie. "known nulls").

@CDR-API-Stream
Copy link
Collaborator

This change is applicable to V2 of the Product Reference Data.

This change has been incorporated into v1.3.0 of the standards.

Data Standards Maintenance automation moved this from In progress to Done Apr 20, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants