You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Rather than have one 'Required Field' column applicable across all exposure classes, and a YES/NO column per class indicating applicability, instead have a 'Required Field' column per class. This allows for fields to have a different required field status depending on exposure class, which is an emerging requirement in the integration of cyber and liability into OED main.
Property
'Required field' (col D in OED Input Fields) --> 'Property field status'
Cyber/Liability
Level of Priority --> {Cyber} Required field and {Liability} Required field
The values in 'level of priority' would be mapped as follows;
Essential --> Required
Highly/Recommended --> Conditionally Required or Optional
Recommended --> Conditionally Required or Optional
Optional --> Conditionally Required or Optional
It is not proposed to keep the original 'Level of Priority' in the specification unless there is a specific use for them.
(They can optionally be retained as a reference table in a separate document)
Reasons for change
There are different levels of requirement for the same fields across lines of business. e.g. Policy financial terms are not required for property, but they are considered essential for cyber policies. It is difficult to align required field status across classes and meet all requirements.
Scope of change
[ X] Specification
Location File
Accounts File
Reinsurance Scope
Reinsurance Info
Impact of change
Part of a major restructuring of the specification.
Non-breaking for property, as the existing 'Required field' column will become the 'Property field status' column, with no other changes.
OED files containing multiple exposure classes would not work due to potential conflicts in required field status, but this does not seem to be a requirement.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks @johcarter. As previously discussed, I don't think the 'level of priority' field is required in the spec as this was only used to guide for the working group for the first draft of the liability/cyber schemas.
johcarter
changed the title
[Specification, All] Introduce required field column by exposure class
[Specification] Introduce required field column by exposure class
Aug 21, 2024
Description
Rather than have one 'Required Field' column applicable across all exposure classes, and a YES/NO column per class indicating applicability, instead have a 'Required Field' column per class. This allows for fields to have a different required field status depending on exposure class, which is an emerging requirement in the integration of cyber and liability into OED main.
Property
'Required field' (col D in OED Input Fields) --> 'Property field status'
Cyber/Liability
Level of Priority --> {Cyber} Required field and {Liability} Required field
The values in 'level of priority' would be mapped as follows;
It is not proposed to keep the original 'Level of Priority' in the specification unless there is a specific use for them.
(They can optionally be retained as a reference table in a separate document)
Reasons for change
There are different levels of requirement for the same fields across lines of business. e.g. Policy financial terms are not required for property, but they are considered essential for cyber policies. It is difficult to align required field status across classes and meet all requirements.
Scope of change
Impact of change
Part of a major restructuring of the specification.
Non-breaking for property, as the existing 'Required field' column will become the 'Property field status' column, with no other changes.
OED files containing multiple exposure classes would not work due to potential conflicts in required field status, but this does not seem to be a requirement.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: