XBRL Specifications

Activity Main Points Comment

XBRL Strategic Initiatives 6 initiativesParticipation neededVolunteer now!!!

Highly participative discussions, wide interest

Inline XBRL Browser html embeds XBRL Wide interest

Rendering Linkbase , rendering user projects

New specs in development, custom pre-spec use

Opposite of inline XBRL

Formula features,formula user projects

New CR modules, Project reports (BE, CN, ES, JA)

Versioning Starting IFRS use US-GAAP present

Semantics and Databases High interest area

International new faces China participates (I enjoyed meeting China formula users)

Abstract Modeling is starting now

Identifying the Goals

Analyzing the Market

Feedback

Identifying the

Initiatives

Initiative Primary Benefit Discussion Document GoalsMake XBRL

easier for developer

s

Improve XBRL

comparability

Make XBRL data easier to consume

1 Create an abstract model

An abstract model provides a conceptual framework for understanding XBRL and gives developers a strong foundation for their implementations.

Yes Yes Yes

2 Produce training materials

High-quality training materials lend support to developers and those new to XBRL.

Yes Yes Yes

3 Define standard API signatures

API signatures assist developers with their implementation of XBRL solutions.

Yes Yes

4 Reorganise existing specification

A reorganisation of the XBRL specification will make the specification easier to understand.

Yes

5 Enhance data comparability

Data comparability widens the applicability of XBRL data across project and international boundaries.

Yes Yes

6 Develop application profiles

Application profiles reduce the scope of XBRL implementations by breaking up the XBRL specification into components.

Yes Yes

XBRL◦ framework for modelling various domains◦ a meta-model, not a model

taxonomy models a domain UML

◦ framework for modelling software infrastructures XII’s relationship to XBRL is as OMG’s to

UML OMG Meta-Object Facility (MOF) models

UML◦ XSB wishes the same for XBRL

Primary model captures XBRL semantics:◦ Core spec and Dimensions are mandatory◦ Model should be void of syntactic details◦ Should be portable across technologies, like SQL

and OOP

Secondary model binds primary model to XML◦ This bridges the gap from model to current spec

Domain (taxonomy) modelling not an objective◦ Parallel modelling efforts will be considered with

BPB involvement Formulas, Versioning, Rendering

◦ XSB will consider

Focused group to delivery over 6-8 weeks◦ Easier to get short commitments◦ Deliverable is of high value to the community, so

sooner the better◦ Abstract model is a prerequisite to several other

initiatives

Format will be:◦ 2 face-to-face meetings over a 4-6 week period

1st meeting scheduled for Boston on Jan 11-13◦ Conference calls daily, or every other day, in

between the face-to-face meetings Dedicated project manager to drive the

process◦ Preparations and materials will be assigned prior

to face-to-face meetings◦ Face-to-face meetings will be divided into 90-120

minute segments, with firm deliverables defined

Use cases◦ What processes is XBRL intended to work in?

Modelling the core specification◦ Facts, units, periods, entities, labels, heirarchy,

etc. Modelling the dimensions specification

◦ Primary item, domain, dimension, member, etc. Binding the models to the current XML

syntax◦ How to bridge the gap from abstract model to the

current XML specs

Review process will have to be open and as inclusive as possible:◦ Review period will have to demonstrate

community coverage◦ Broad outreach (webcasts, conferences, etc.) will

be a necessity◦ Specific, targeted outreach will also need to be

conducted where necessary

Initiative Resource Type

1 Create an abstract model Program/Project ManagersUML ModelersSoftware ArchitectsXBRL PractionersBusiness Reporting Domain Experts

2 Produce training materials Publications CoordinatorSoftware DevelopersTech WritersAcademics

3 Define standard API signatures Program/Project ManagerSoftware ArchitectsXBRL Practioners

4 Reorganise existing specification Publications CoordinatorTech WritersSoftware Developers/TestersXBRL experts

5 Enhance data comparability Domain ExpertsFinancial ProfessionalsXBRL Taxonomists

6 Develop application profiles XBRL TechnologistsXBRL Practioners

Initiative Volunteers from

1 Create an abstract model US,CA, DE, ES, FR, PL, CN, AU

2 Produce training materials US, CA, DE, PL, AU

3 Define standard API signatures US, CH, DE, PL, AU

4 Reorganise existing specification US, CA, FR, PL, CN

5 Enhance data comparability US, CA, DE, FR

6 Develop application profiles US, CA, AU

volunteers@xbrl.org

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2010Initiatives

Number

Description Testcases

Date

368 Calculation linkbase checking currently infers precision, any value 0 implies precision 0, which is then always inconconsistent. Proposed spec change to infer decimals. (Testing SEC filings to determine impact of this change)

2009-09

396 Different dimensions share domain members.

272-SharedDomain

2010-04

424 Units with unbound xbrli prefix namespace for pure and shares

304-v12a, v15a

2010-08

s-equals, v-equals, functions: id-attribute sensitivity, drop Xpath 2 eq use, assigned to Formula WG

2010-01, 2010-09

Items reported in precision 0 always invalid Items reported in decimals with value 0

◦ Infers precision 0◦ Technically always invalid

Changing to infer decimals◦ Known financial reporting is in decimals◦ Eliminates issues with 0-valued items, edge cases◦ Test suite has been updated

Extension module Feature Status

AspectCover Filters CR

Concept Relation Filter CR

Custom Function Implementation CR

Generic Messages CR

Validation Messages CR

Instances (multi-instance, and variable-set chaining) CR

Tuple output On-hold, PWD

1. CEBS member formula issues 2. Dimensional aspects of fallback values 3. Debugging capabilities 3. Rendering of new FINREP and COREP 4. Rendering ideas and formulae editoring

26

CR

PWD

status

Unchanged from business perspective Concept and dimensions aspects changed

A, B, C and X are primary items D is a dimension d1, d2 and d3 are domain members

Version 1 Version 2 A <==> X ( D = d1 ) B <==> X ( D = d2 ) C <==> X ( D = d3 )

<verdim:aspectModelChange>

<verdim:fromAspects> <verdim:concept href="../dts1.xsd#A"/> </verdim:fromAspects>

<verdim:toAspects> <verdim:concept href="../dts2.xsd#X"/> <verdim:explicitDimension href="../dts1.xsd#D">

<verdim:member href="../dts1.xsd#d1"/> </verdim:explicitDimension> </verdim:toAspects>

</verdim:aspectModelChange>

Predicate expression (Xpath 2)◦ Identifies fact by relative location

<gl:entryDetail> <gl:amount>500</gl:amount> <gl:xbrlInfo> <gl:summaryReportingElement>Cash</gl:summaryReportingElement> </gl:xbrlInfo></gl:entryDetail>

<fr:cash>500</fr:cash>

<verdim:concept href=“…gl.xsd#amount"/>

<verdim:location>

../gl:xbrlinfo/gl:summaryReportingElement eq ‘Cash’

</verdim:location> <verdim:concept

href=“…fr.xsd#cash"/>

<verdim:aspectModelChange>

<verdim:fromAspects> <verdim:concept href=“…gl.xsd#amount"/>

<verdim:location> ../gl:xbrlinfo/gl:summaryReportingElement eq ‘Cash’ </verdim:location>

</verdim:fromAspects>

<verdim:toAspects> <verdim:concept href="../fr.xsd#cash"/>

</verdim:toAspects>

</verdim:aspectModelChange>

<xbrli:xbrl><gl:accountingEntries> <gl:entryHeader>

<gl:qualifierEntry …>balance-brought-forward</ …>

<gl:entryDetail> <gl:account> <gl:a ccountMainID…>5100</ …> <gl:accountMainDescription …

>Supplies</ …> <gl:accountType …>account</ …> </gl:account> <gl:amount …>242678.26</ …> <gl:debitCreditCode …">D</ …> <gl:xbrlInfo>

<gl:xbrlInclude …>beginning_balance</…>

</gl:xbrlInfo> </gl:entryDetail> …

</ gl:entryHeader> <gl:entryHeader>

<gl:qualifierEntry …>standard</ …> <gl:entryDetail>

… </gl:entryDetail>

… </ gl:entryHeader></ gl:accountingEntries>

</ xbrli:xbrl>

<verdim:concept href=“…gl.xsd#amount"/>

<verdim:location>

../../gl:qualifierEntry eq ’balance-brought-forward’

and

../gl:account/gl:accountMainID eq ‘5100’

and

../gl:xbrlinfo/gl:xbrlInclude eq ‘beginning_balance’

</verdim:location>

Inline XBRL - REC◦ embeds XBRL fragments into an HTML document

Requirements for linkbase – Drafting Linkbase spec – Modularized & new specs

inline XBRLRequirements

LinkbaseFuture

Separation of Specification◦ Improve understanding and extendsibility

New Models◦ Inheritance mechanism◦ Injection model

New Specifications ◦ Identification and Ordering◦ Context Grouping◦ Generic Preferred Label◦ Manifest

42

Public Taxonomy author

Identification a

nd orde

ring Ta

xonom

y

Detailed rendering structure

Extension Taxonomy

Extended table of contents

User specific Rendering Structure

Instance / Inline XBRL

Taxonomy 2.1 spec dimensions

Data preparer

Put as much as information herePut as much as information here

Less information hereLess information here

43

Public Taxonomy author

Identification a

nd orde

ring Ta

xonom

y

Detailed rendering structure

Create report

Taxonomy 2.1 spec dimensions

Report from Taxonomy information

Ex: Manual Guidelines etc…

44

Current spec provides document model to rendering modeling:◦ document layered model.

Uses linkbase mechanism to represent entire reporting document model.

Additional model introduced:◦ Injection model.

Uses existing rendering format (such as XHTML ) then inject rendering definition into the format.

45

Document

ComponentsContainers

relationships

relationships

XLink resource

XLink arcLegendComponent

Container

Document

46

Rendering Components

Legend

XHTML etc..

image

Tables, lists, paragraphs are injected into exiting format (XHTML as such)

47

Heavy use of definition link by XBRL Dimensions, same mechanism such as preferred label in presentation link solves rendering issues.

Generic preferred label is a new mechanism to ‘preferredLabel’ attribute on definition/calculation/generic arcs.

48

Specification are separated into:◦ Semantics

Semantic modeling definition regarding the specifications◦ Structure

One basic model to represent reporting document structure◦ Axes

Set of axis definitions which could be used to rendering component◦ Components

Set of component definitions that could be used in the report structure◦ Values

Set of value definitions that could be used to represent cell pattern.◦ Rules

Set of rule definitions that could be used from any part of rendering information.◦ Identification and Ordering (Table of Contents)

Mechanism to identify statements (build table of contents explicitly)◦ Context Grouping

Mechanism to create group of contexts◦ Generic Preferred Label

Mechanism to specify preferred label into linkbases other than presentation linkbase.◦ Manifest

Mechanism to package XBRL doucments

49