[This message was posted by John Prewett of Lava Trading <[email protected]> to the "General Q/A" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/22. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/2ed9af61 - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
> Behaviors such as this are subject to the rules of engagement. In the > case of reduction in quantity - there are behaviors supported by some > exchanges that allow the indicated quantity to be interpreted as the > quantity remaining open to be filled. Again, this behavior and the > corresponding messaging values are described in the rules of engagement > for the exchange. All behavior is subject to documented rules of engagement. I was indicating what the behavior should be if the execution venue followed the specification. We have this standard to reduce the effort taken to establish communications with a new entity and also to reduce the number of trading discrepancies. When protocol deviations are introduced, the effort taken to establish communications with a new entity increases and misunderstandings are more likely to occur. So using non-standard rules of engagement reduces the efficiency of everyone's organizations and can cause trading discrepancies, particularly in edge cases (such as quantity reduction). Execution venues have a special role in standards adherence. They set the tone for the rest of the industry. Sorry to I've start preaching here, but I believe that following the standard is very important. Thanks JohnP [You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to mailto:[email protected]] -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Financial Information eXchange" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fix-protocol?hl=en.
