OpenForex Standards

The working standards catalog of the OpenForex Society, the standard-setting core of the OpenForex Foundation.

Publication status

Published by the OpenForex Society, the standard-setting core of the OpenForex Foundation, as part of its established standards service to the open standards community.

Version

0.2.0

Last Updated

2026-09-24

Current catalog

OpenForex Standards are ratified, established, and maintained as an operational standards service to the open standards community. Their authority derives from the OpenForex Society. The references in this catalog document the working framework and its implementation responsibilities.

Publication lifecycle

A Draft may change substantially. Review indicates that a named revision has been submitted for structured assessment. Approved means an authorized decision record identifies the accepted text and its effective version. Deprecated material remains available for historical interpretation and should point to its replacement.

Reference articles explain the working Standard, while examples demonstrate particular relationships. Future amendments pass through the review lifecycle; that lifecycle does not place the established Standard back into draft status.

What belongs in a specification

A complete specification states its scope, terminology, input domain, behavior, errors, invariants, security considerations, and compatibility boundaries. It identifies the tests and evidence by which a claim can be checked. Requirements should say what an implementation must do, and separate that from commentary explaining why.

Change discipline

A correction that changes technical meaning requires review even if it looks editorial. A change to a formula, numeric policy, accepted input, or failure condition may invalidate previous results. Record the changed behavior and explain migration expectations before assigning release status.

Making a proposal

Start with an RFC, identify affected documents, and include a concrete before-and-after example. Reviewers should be able to evaluate the change without reconstructing a private discussion.

The governance model describes institutional responsibilities. The contribution workflow describes how to prepare evidence and publish an accepted revision.