Simplicity’ led to an extremely small set of terms, resulting in a lean extension, whilst ‘practicality’ limited the scope of terms to reflect the most important objects, as seen from the retail banking perspective. The principles of ‘Occam’s Razor’ dictated the focus on terms, reflecting the general consumer preferences observed from the perspective of their searches and typical digital financial activities. Some of the types and properties that reflect these objects, that describe their features, were already defined in schema. Others fixed deposit investment at a financial institution in sa entered into life in the “core” vocabulary in May 2016 with the publication of schema.

0, and the totality of the terms was made available in March 2017 with the publication of schema. Despite their various origins, in this page we treat them all equally using the umbrella term “financial extension”. As all of them exist in the common shared schema. There is no doubt that the extension in the current form may not satisfy all the needs of the banks and other financial institutions. However, it creates a framework that can be utilised now and can bring huge benefits despite its small footprint. The authors of this project are committed to the future development of the financial “face” of the schema.

This will include both the addition and amendment of the most important types and properties to the schema. As it was explained before, the map contains elements from both the schema. The branches already defined in the schema. The basic models of the financial objects The diagram below illustrates the basic pattern for the description of the main classes of the financial objects of interest. The remaining examples are illustrated only by JSON-LD code. The account is identified by its name and description.