![]() |
| Home | ![]() |
Phase I | ![]() |
Phase II | ![]() |
Phase III | ![]() |
Acknowledgments |
|
Phase I Overview
Reduced FormatThe III WG is charged with the preparation of a standard IFRS-based questionnaire with two levels of detail:
It is the Reduced Format that is used in this XBRL project.
ObjectiveThe aim of the Reduced Format is to have it act as a compromise of minimum information collection throughout European CBSOs though there is no formal compromise of using it completely. That is, to use it to collect the data available in future within the ECCBSO. Of course, each member will frelly decide to extend it, according to its needs for their national use.
HistoryWith respect to the preparation of an IFRS format that could be used in the future as a common questionnaire, the III WG decided to build up a standard input. The working method followed by the group was to look into the different IFRS approved by the IASB, and to create, as a methodology of working, a questionnaire as extensive as possible as an initial step. Afterwards, the participants in the WG would test and decide on the information considered essential and useful in order to reduce e the extension of the format or, at least, to foresee what the common points of the European CBSO databases could be in the future. For this purpose, the IFRS-GP taxonomy has been used. The extended standard format and its methodological note were finished between 2002 and 2004.
During 2004 the III WG initiated the definition of the standard Reduced Format, once the opinion about essential items in the extended format were provided by each member. It was decided then to consider the construction of the reduced format, as a first approach to building it, that only those items stated as essential by at least four countries were included.
This work gave rise to a first draft of the Reduced Format. In 2005, inconsistencies within the format and with the extended format were analysed and removed. Some line items, which were not deemed essential as separate item but were in aggregate, were merged.
|
| Contact UsLegal |