Meeting Minutes

Release Plan

• v1.25.0 incorporating changes from MI15 in Decision Proposal 303 and changes to NFRs described on the thread for Decision Proposal 288 - Non-Functional Requirements Revision was published on 8 July.
• Changes arising from MI16 are being targeted for v1.26.0.

Maintenance Iteration 15 Retrospective

As part of the MI15 retrospective, a concern was raised that some issues may not have a clear enough use-case or context provided for the change being requested.

• Examples of issues where clarity is lacking were requested for DSB to review.

Outstanding Actions

NOTE: Where a :bulb: appears it indicates the Action will be discussed in the Candidates section of the Agenda.

InfoSec

• DSB to seek legal advice on the enforceability or the binding status of the standards versus an implementation guide with regard to Issue #522 OpenID Provider Configuration End Point parameter requirements.
  • Issue 522 was incorporated into Standards v1.25.0, under Security Endpoints
  • This action will be closed, but any further guidance will be provided when available.

Maintenance Iteration 16 Candidates

The candidates listed below have been proposed for consultation in this iteration or require further consideration by DSB.

The DSB encourages participants to review these and post comments for consideration in developing solution proposals.

CX:

• None proposed

Security:

• None proposed

Register:

• It was noted that issue #480 1.13.0 appears to have broken pseudonymity of Pairwise Identifiers had been suggested for consideration as a Decision Proposal.
  • DSB will review the issue.

Banking:

• #229 – Service field in the Get Transaction Details API
  • The DSB is seeking feedback on whether this item should be prioritised for this iteration and/or made urgent. If an urgent change is requested, this would mean the DSB would need to seek approval from the Data Standards Chair to make the change as soon as possible. If not urgent, this will be incorporated with other changes at the end of iteration 16.
• #584 - Flag for account(s) not shared
  • Transferred to a Decision Proposal placeholder, see: Ability for ADR to request all accounts or identify missing accounts #130
• #593 – Interest paid at maturity guidance for applicationFrequency in BankingProductDepositRate
• #595 – Use of additionalValue field in Product Eligibility Types

Energy:

• None proposed

Common:

• #376 - Include FAX as CommonPhoneNumber purpose
  • DSB is seeking further feedback on this issue, please review and add any comments.

Schema:

• #469 – Add isQueryParamUnsupported to MetaPaginated for schema validation
  • Potential candidate carried over from MI15. This change could resolve a gap in the current specification of the Get Transactions For Account endpoint.

Errors:

• #412 – Proposal to change specific error codes from MUSTs to SHOULDs
  • Although changes to errors have been raised in the MI16 holistic issue, issue #412 may require further discussion or participant support for prioritisation. Please review and add any comments.

NFRs:

• None proposed

Operational:

• None proposed

Documentation:

• None proposed
• See #599 – Maintenance Iteration 16 Holistic Feedback for minor documentation updates and other amendments.

Other business

• Three concerns were raised relating to the recently published changes to the Get Metrics endpoint:
  • Typo in the description of the ErrorMetrics schema
    • [DSB update 19 July] This was corrected in-place by an update to the Standards on 17 July.
  • Query about the contents of the PerformanceMetrics objects for the currentDay and previousDays
    • [DSB update 19 July] These are correct in the Standards. Apart from the aggregate object, the currentDay values are expected to be an array of 24 strings and the previousDays values are an array of arrays, forming up to 7 days of 24 hours each. This level of detail may be conveyed more clearly in the Admin OpenAPI Specification itself.
  • Incorrect field name in the abandonmentsByStage object
    • [DSB update 19 July] This was corrected in-place by an update to the Standards on 17 July.

Next Steps

• DSB encourages the community to review the proposed candidates for this iteration and post comments on the respective issues if there are any concerns or implications to consider.
• DSB will review the proposed candidates and monitor for comments to assist with analysis.