simplification of the hierarchy of disclosures

[Phamon]

I had a new (disrupting) idea about the hierarchy of disclosures:
In the IFRS taxonomy there is a sort of hierarchy:

• level 1: disclosures that are defined as "entire disclosure" of a topic (57 elements)
• level 2: disclosures that are referenced to specific IFRS (11 aditionnal elements)
• level 3: disclosures defined as "common practices" (155 elements)

Any disclosure or accounting policy relating to level 1 and 2 must be tagged specifically and with tag of the parent in level 1 or level 2
Any disclosure relating to level 3 must be tagged if present, tagged with the parent in level 1 or 2 (if any) without any hierarchy or to the root if it is not related to a parent in the list (67 elements)

This would simplify the imbrications (3 levels maximum) an ease the selection of tags

I can share the excel file that illustrates this.

[Phamon]

For example:
all these tags are "common practice elements"

<style> </style>

DisclosureOfFinanceIncomeExpenseExplanatory

DescriptionOfAccountingPolicyForFinanceCostsExplanatory
DisclosureOfFinanceIncomeExplanatory
DisclosureOfFinanceCostExplanatory

This means that there are different ways of disclosing the information about finance income and finance costs: for me, it does not mean that every issuer should tag finance cost with the grouping of income and costs nor that the accounting policy should be tagged with the disclosure tag. these tags are at the same level and if corresponding blocktext of one of them is present then it should be used for tagging. No other consideration of supposed hierarchy.
The example is not good guidance.

A good example wouls have been:

<style> </style>

DisclosureOfShareCapitalReservesAndOtherEquityInterestExplanatory

DisclosureOfReservesAndOtherEquityInterestExplanatory
DisclosureOfIssuedCapitalExplanatory
DescriptionOfAccountingPolicyForIssuedCapitalExplanatory

If you have a disclosure about accounting policy for issued capital (common practice), then you would have to tag it with: DescriptionOfAccountingPolicyForIssuedCapitalExplanatory and DisclosureOfShareCapitalReservesAndOtherEquityInterestExplanatory (the entire disclosure for)

[ThVERDIN]

The ERM says: "preparers have to consider the accounting meaning of a taxonomy element when selecting the appropriate block tag for marking up such disclosure". Therefore I would build the blocktag hierachy on accounting standards, not on taxonomy documentation.

If the mention "entire disclosures" seems tehrefore not clear for me (and I would not take any conclusion from it), I agree that General Practices are at same level (both having accounting meaning with narrower and wider elements). We have to focus on those having an IFRS reference.