Question about applying XBRL Core Specs (2.1 & Dimensions 1.0)
Json, park
We are a team from an XBRL software development company in South Korea. During our development process, we've encountered a puzzling situation regarding XBRL compliance here and would greatly appreciate your expert insights.
Our analysis of recent Korean XBRL filings has revealed a significant issue. Using Arelle, we validated 1,871 reports filed between 2023 and Q1 2025. The results showed that approximately 50% of these reports fail to comply with the core XBRL 2.1 and XBRL Dimensions 1.0 specifications.
This is concerning because the namespaces within these Korean XBRL files explicitly declare that they are based on these core specifications. As we understand it, violations of these specs are classified as "ERROR" under the XBRL Assertion Severity 2.0 standard, as they breach the "minimal syntax and structure" requirements. Despite this, it appears the filing system has been operating this way for over two years without rejecting these non-compliant reports.
This situation leads us to two fundamental questions for the community:
1. Is our understanding correct that the core specifications—XBRL 2.1 and XBRL Dimensions 1.0—are universally mandatory for any valid XBRL implementation, regardless of the jurisdiction or the software used?
2. If so, shouldn't filings that violate these core specifications be rejected at the point of submission by a regulator's filing system?
We are trying to confirm if our fundamental understanding of XBRL compliance and enforcement is correct.
Any clarification or perspective you can provide would be immensely helpful.
Thank you.
Austin Matherne
Herman Fischer
Yes to both questions, XBRL 2.1 and Dimensions 1.0 errors are considered blockers for filing to agencies accepting financial and prudential reports.
Issues which XBRL specifications consider warnings are generally not blockers from accepting a filing.
Assertions Severity is an independent specification for XBRL formula assertions and has no relationship to the base specifications such as 2.1 and Dimensions.
Herm Fischer
Ps – if the filings are unrelated to financial and prudential reporting, like history of washing your car, requirements might be different.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Arelle-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
arelle-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/arelle-users/9340fdab-6c12-42fd-b9c4-10d236d72c5cn%40googlegroups.com.
Jaso, Park
1. The following are the types of error codes we have frequently observed
xbrl.3.5.2.4.5:roleRefDuplicate
xbrl.3.5.2.4:missingRoleRef
xbrl.3.5.2.4:roleNotAbsolute
xbrl.3.5.4:hrefIdNotFound
xbrl.5.1.3.4:custRoleUsedOn
xbrl.5.1.4.3:cycles
xbrl.5.2.2.1:labelLinkLocTarget
xbrl.5.2.4.2.1:preferredLabelMissing
xbrldie:ExplicitMemberUndefinedQNameError
xbrldie:PrimaryItemDimensionallyInvalidError
xbrldte:DomainMemberSourceError
xbrldte:TooManyDefaultMembersError
xmlSchema:valueError
2. How to Download the Public Reports
XBRL files can be downloaded from DART, the official public disclosure system in South Korea. We also performed our validation using these exact files.
For example, an XBRL report downloaded by following the steps below generates 451 core specification violation logs:
Search for "dart english" on Google.
On the DART website, search for "hanwha" in the search bar.
In the "Type of Disclosure" section, check the "Periodic Disclosure" box and click "Search."
From the search results, select "XBRL viewer" for the "Annual Report (2024.12)" item.
In the top-right corner of the pop-up window, go to "Download" and select "Annual Report_IFRS(Original XBRL)(2025.03.31)" to download the file.
3. A "Core specification violation" is a fundamental problem indicating that the document is not valid as an XBRL document. I understand that "assertion severity" would only apply to an already valid XBRL document. Thank you for your feedback on this.
P.S. I had to log in with a different account to post this, possibly due to a Google Groups filter. Thank you for your understanding.
Best regards,
Jason Park
Herman Fischer
Hi Jason,
Filings with these errors should not be accepted by a filing authority. These are not casual warnings, they are an indication that there are serious errors in the reported data or structural issues with the report taxonomy.
Herm Fischer
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/arelle-users/9518d9a7-eaf7-48a1-9d2f-f38daf302ff7n%40googlegroups.com.
Jaso, Park
Hi Herm,
Thank you very much for your insightful response. It has given us a much clearer understanding of the problems and the current situation surrounding XBRL reports in Korea.
We believe there is a lack of a fundamental, systematic validation process from the regulatory authorities, even though this is a key part of the national financial information infrastructure.
We were also very impressed to learn that you are the creator of Arelle and an expert who has helped define many of the XBRL standards. For us as a solution provider, receiving this direct confirmation from a pioneer in the field is both a great honor and a significant help.
Our team is focused on developing solutions that leverage AI to create accurate XBRL reports and unlock the potential of XBRL data. Should your travels ever bring you to South Korea, it would be a tremendous honor to host you at our company in Gangnam, Seoul.
Sincerely,
Jason, Park