Imported from previous forum
I do not know what role 44 was created for exactly. There is no elaboration to clarify that. The role of an operator is not really defined, only trader, desk, unit, firm where we have the distinction between entering and executing. You can now use PartyRoleQualifier(2376) to provide more granularity to roles. It does not allow user-defined values, requires a Gap Analysis.
There is a party role for order entry operator ID (452=44) but is there another role for something like order origination operator ID and order origination session? This would be something similar to how there are party roles for order origination trader (452=11) and order origination firm (13).
Operator is basically the one responsible for the system while entering orders to the exchange (attached). Are you saying that PartyRole=44 would be repeated twice and PartyRoleQualifier would be used to indicate if it was the origination operator ID? Same with session also? (repeat PartyRole=55 twice and use PartyRoleQualifier to indicate if it was the order origination session)
That depends on the number of identical party roles you need to have in a single message. If you need to entry operator IDs and two sessions, then the answer is yes, you have two instances of PartyID having the same PartyRole value but one of them additionally has a PartyRoleQualifier to say “Origination”. It would allow to deprecate PartyRoles 11 and 13.
Could we do a gap analysis to add PartyRoleQualifier=Origination similar to PartyRoleQualifier=New and PartyRoleQualifier=Current?
Of course you can submit a Gap Analysis but I can only speak for myself here that it makes sense. I cannot guarantee that it will be accepted.
Yes of course, understood