Correct for spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Make sure you choose the most appropriate words that will make the message more meaningful and enthusiastic. Do not change the meaning nor the intent of the message.
Hi Louis,
Hope you have had a great week. Mine was ok but not found a way yet to breakout from waiting till the end of the week to provide my update. Anyway, without further ado, this is my breakdown day by day.
Monday 
I look through the document and the LC code on representativeness. My goal was to find out graphs in the incumbent analysis that weren’t covered by the well-developed LC code. I also wondered where I would find the right mapping from ISO to Region as ours is clearly different from the LC. I think it’s quite an important feature which obviously is project dependent. So I need support in working out what to do. I successfully, extracted all relevant code needed from the LC. The next task was to adapt an test on the BPD datasets.
Tuesday
In DS absence, I had to attend the data team meeting at 12. I did and there was any action points from the meeting. XW was also in attendance and she did respond to the two questions put to the MT. In the future, it would be good to take note even if not to share if anyone else. I think building this habit is important especially when something discussed could later be used but if I have no record of it, it would become more challenging. So please help remind me of this often. I need to get the LC code working no matter how little, which I did. I was trying to work out what data I needed to match all the graphs in the model document e.g. SP/MD. Some of the datasets were self-evident but other not so. I made a point to identify what other graphs that are not covered by the LC code this would include distributions of key risk factors. I needed to think about some other analysis that might be possible in the future but not now for example if external data becomes available. This would help to put a skeleton code or at least a place holder. To be honest, that was not attempted and that is something I need to think about early next week. 
Wednesday
The question about the ISO mapping came to fore once more as I had yet to identify how it was done. Well, that’s not completely true. I found the SAS code, but it was insufficient to answer my question. It seems there is something we do not have access to which makes it difficult to replicate the analysis. I found out about two categories: European Org. and Multi. European Org are European-wide banks like ECB and Multi stands for Multilateral banks. With that information, I thought the next course of action was to figure out how to identify multilateral banks and European wide banks. Then using that I would find a way to override the assigned region. XW suggested I looked at Appendix A or V for multilateral. JS sent an email at 13:11 which seemed to have list of multilateral too, although they are confirmed so need to revisit if I go ahead with that list. With the help of Aiden’s mate I came up with a tentative mapping but I wanted to check whether it made sense or not. An using MEA for Africa would that be a reasonable substitute?  DS sent an email at 13:59 with links to some documents we should all be familiar with as we progress in the project. I haven’t had a look yet but I hope many of those things would be familiar, if not it’s important I set a time to go through them ASAP. DS enquired how long it might take to complete the RDS Acceptability. Although I responded 20-30%, I am wondering whether my estimate was reasonable.  

Thursday
I received an invite for Aiden biweekly meeting but I turned it down because I had the standup scheduled for the same time. But that reminded me of putting together our proposal how we intent to use it. By now, other users would have included their plans so I could benefit from that and speed up the time and quality of ours. I had promised to share the plan with DS in first instance so it’s important I do that soon rather than later. I had to make time to look into the DET query log but unfortunately, I didn’t. DS suggested I look at a flag for European banks in the data dictionary in first instance and if we couldn’t figure it out we would reach out to the data team. I spoke to Wita about it and she confirmed there is no such flag but encouraged me to raise it. As part of the representativeness, DS suggested I include Challenger Banks. He shared the info in the teams channel. He also said I should speak to XW or AG to get the field they are using for country of residence which is probably more granular. I spoke with XW and we found actually two fields; country of residence and country of residence ISO. The former is quite granular so would require are find a way to map countries to region. The second is almost at the same level as what was previously use except how do we map MEA, should UK be merged with Europe? How would I handle Multi and other given country of residence is had coded in some of the functions? I have got a work around, although not sure it that is the most efficient way to do it. Wita mentioned that she raised a question about macroeconomic variables so it would be good if we could come back to her with our views. I only vaguely remember that but I thought I would check it on Friday.
Friday
For today, I was planning to take a look at the query on Macroeconomic variables and ask the team if anyone could help with it in case I couldn’t. Is it time I raise the query about how to identify European wide banks e.g. ECB? DS even questioned why we would need such in the standup this morning when I mentioned it. DS requested that we go through the outstanding queries from the DET log and response to what we could. We would then share with him what is left open to see when we can address them. Although he specifically asked me to draft that email, JS is keen on doing it. But please don’t let me lose sigh of it. I would have to set a meeting for latest next Friday to discuss in detail the requirement for data representativeness checks. DS was to share the email of a colleague I could speak to (forgotten their team) to ask about the mapping to regions. I needed to speak to XW about other possible segments e.g. policy banks. She sent a link which I need to look at some time next week. DS will reach out some time next week to discuss progress on the RDS acceptance. Still the question remain, why we need any European bank as a segment. I have one item addressed to me on the query log which I need to confirm its status. It’s on the entities in RDS no found in ICL. I didn’t do the check when we received the updated version of the ICL.  I did some sketch plot for the numeric variable distributions but they probably require some refining and I also need to think if we need something for qualitative variables. Although qualitative variables should be less challenging.

That’s me done.
Have a great week, Speak next week
Cheers
Frank