XBRL Specifications
Activity
Main Points
Comment
XBRL Strategic Initiatives 6 initiatives
Participation needed
Volunteer now!!!
Highly participative
discussions, wide
interest
Inline XBRL
Browser html embeds XBRL
Wide interest
Rendering Linkbase ,
rendering user projects
Formula features,
formula user projects
Versioning
New specs in development,
Opposite of inline XBRL
custom pre-spec use
New CR modules,
Project reports (BE, CN, ES, JA)
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
Oct ‘09
What are the long term
strategic goals for XBRL?
Nov ‘09
Face-to-face Meeting in
Brussels
XSB summarized the
suggestions into 3 main goals
Feb ‘10
Publication of Discussion
Document
XSB published their
recommendations
Analyzing the
Market
Feedback
Identifying
the Initiatives
XSB provided suggestions and
debated them on weekly XSB calls
Mar ‘10
Feedback window was opened
XII reached out to the community
to actively gather feedback
Apr ‘10
Feedback window was closed
XSB analyzed and summarized
the feedback that was received
May ‘10
Face-to-face meeting in Brussels
XSB defined the framework for
the six initiatives
Aug ‘10
What exactly are the
initiatives?
XSB defined each initiative in
much greater detail
Sep ‘10
Internal Review of Initiatives
XSB circulated the document
internally for feedback
Oct ‘10
Preserve. Promote.
Participate.
XSB released the document
on October 6, 2010
Initiative
Primary Benefit
1 Create an
abstract
model
An abstract model provides a conceptual
framework for understanding XBRL and
gives developers a strong foundation for
their implementations.
2 Produce
training
materials
3 Define
standard API
signatures
4 Reorganise
existing
specification
5 Enhance data
comparability
High-quality training materials lend
support to developers and those new to
XBRL.
API signatures assist developers with their
implementation of XBRL solutions.
6 Develop
application
profiles
Application profiles reduce the scope of
XBRL implementations by breaking up the
XBRL specification into components.
A reorganisation of the XBRL specification
will make the specification easier to
understand.
Data comparability widens the
applicability of XBRL data across project
and international boundaries.
Discussion Document Goals
Make XBRL
easier for
developers
Improve XBRL
comparability
Make XBRL
data easier
to consume
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
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
1
Create an abstract model
2
Produce training materials
3
Define standard API signatures
4
Reorganise existing specification
5
Enhance data comparability
6
Develop application profiles
Resource Type
Program/Project Managers
UML Modelers
Software Architects
XBRL Practioners
Business Reporting Domain Experts
Publications Coordinator
Software Developers
Tech Writers
Academics
Program/Project Manager
Software Architects
XBRL Practioners
Publications Coordinator
Tech Writers
Software Developers/Testers
XBRL experts
Domain Experts
Financial Professionals
XBRL Taxonomists
XBRL Technologists
XBRL 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/2010Initi
atives
Number
Description
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)
Different dimensions share domain
272members.
SharedDo
main
396
424
Units with unbound xbrli prefix
namespace for pure and shares
s-equals, v-equals, functions: idattribute sensitivity, drop Xpath 2 eq use,
assigned to Formula WG
Testcases
Date
200909
201004
304-v12a, 2010v15a
08
201001,
201009


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
The total of a binding calculation is defined to be the sum of the
rounded values of the contributing numeric items in the binding,
each multiplied by the value of the weight attribute on the item's
associated calculationArc. This multiplication takes place after
any necessary rounding is performed. The rounded value of a
numeric item is the result of rounding the value of the numeric
item to its precision decimals or inferred precision decimals (see
Section 4.6.6 and ). A binding calculation is defined to be
consistent if the rounded value of the summation item is equal to
the total rounded to the precision decimals or inferred precision
decimals of the summation item. (If any item of the calculation
has a precision attribute value 0 then the binding calculation is
deemed to be inconsistent.)
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.
2.
3.
3.
4.
CEBS member formula issues
Dimensional aspects of fallback values
Debugging capabilities
Rendering of new FINREP and COREP
Rendering ideas and formulae editoring
status
CR
PWD
26


Unchanged from business perspective
Concept and dimensions aspects changed
Version 1
Version 2
A <==> X ( D = d1 )
B <==> X ( D = d2 )
C <==> X ( D = d3 )



A, B, C and X are primary items
D is a dimension
d1, d2 and d3 are domain members
<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>
<verdim:concept href=“…gl.xsd#amount"/>
<verdim:location>
../gl:xbrlinfo/gl:summaryReportingElement eq ‘Cash’
</verdim:location>
<fr:cash>500</fr:cash>
<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>
<verdim:concept href=“…gl.xsd#amount"/>
<gl:account>
<gl:a ccountMainID…>5100</ …>
<verdim:location>
<gl:accountMainDescription …>Supplies</ …>
../../gl:qualifierEntry eq ’balance-brought-forward’
<gl:accountType …>account</ …>
</gl:account>
and
<gl:amount …>242678.26</ …>
../gl:account/gl:accountMainID eq ‘5100’
<gl:debitCreditCode …">D</ …>
and
<gl:xbrlInfo>
<gl:xbrlInclude …>beginning_balance</…>
../gl:xbrlinfo/gl:xbrlInclude eq ‘beginning_balance’
</gl:xbrlInfo>
</verdim:location>
</gl:entryDetail>
…
</ gl:entryHeader>
<gl:entryHeader>
<gl:qualifierEntry …>standard</ …>
<gl:entryDetail>
…
</gl:entryDetail>
…
</ gl:entryHeader>
</ gl:accountingEntries>
</ xbrli:xbrl>

Inline XBRL - REC
◦ embeds XBRL fragments into an HTML document


Requirements for linkbase – Drafting
Linkbase spec – Modularized & new specs
inline XBRL
Requirements
Linkbase
Future

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 and
ordering Taxonomy
Taxonomy
2.1 spec
dimensions
Detailed rendering
structure
Put as much as information here
Data preparer
Extension Taxonomy
Extended table of
contents
Instance /
Inline XBRL
User specific
Rendering Structure
Less information here
43
Public Taxonomy author
Identification and
ordering Taxonomy
Taxonomy
2.1 spec
dimensions
Report from
Taxonomy
information
Create report
Ex:
Manual
Guidelines
etc…
Detailed rendering
structure
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
Legend
XLink arc
Component
Container
XLink resource
Document
relationships
relationships
Document
Containers
Components
46
Tables, lists, paragraphs
are injected into exiting
format (XHTML as such)
image
Legend
Rendering Components
XHTML etc..
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

One basic model to represent reporting document structure

Set of axis definitions which could be used to rendering component

Set of component definitions that could be used in the report structure

Set of value definitions that could be used to represent cell pattern.

Set of rule definitions that could be used from any part of rendering information.

Mechanism to identify statements (build table of contents explicitly)

Mechanism to create group of contexts

Mechanism to specify preferred label into linkbases other than presentation linkbase.

Mechanism to package XBRL doucments
◦ Structure
◦ Axes
◦ Components
◦ Values
◦ Rules
◦ Identification and Ordering (Table of Contents)
◦ Context Grouping
◦ Generic Preferred Label
◦ Manifest
49