FIBOFTF — Incorrect definition for ContractCounterparty

In Contracts.rdf a definition has been introduced for "ContractCounterparty" which is that of counterparty to a transaction not a contract. It is sourced from a definition for "counterparty" not contract counterparty and the editorialNote contains a request from Elisa Kendall that we consider changing the name of this term to simply "counterparty". This would have the effect of changing all three of the name, definition and intended meaning of this concept, to a different concept. As the model stands it has the label and intended semantics of one concept and the definition of a separate concept, which is incorrect.

The original model has a definition for this concept which was replaced by the above without peer review. Recommendation: re-instate the existing definition if a better definition cannot be sourced for the concept which was originally modeled here.

Additional impact: If we plan to use editorialNote for internal exchanges then these should not be reported in the spec (raise a formal change note on the tabular report generation plug-in to eliminate these).

In Contracts.rdf a definition has been introduced for "ContractCounterparty" which is that of counterparty to a transaction not a contract. It is sourced from a definition for "counterparty" not contract counterparty and the editorialNote contains a request from Elisa Kendall that we consider changing the name of this term to simply "counterparty". This would have the effect of changing all three of the name, definition and intended meaning of this concept, to a different concept. As the model stands it has the label and intended semantics of one concept and the definition of a separate concept, which is incorrect. The original model has a definition for this concept which was replaced by the above without peer review. Recommendation: re-instate the existing definition if a better definition cannot be sourced for the concept which was originally modeled here.