Reporting Templates, Validations

We have a question regards the new S.12.01.01 row R0370 "Expected profits included in future premiums (EPIFP)" and S.17.01.01 row R0500 (same label) added to the 2.8 taxonomy and associated LOG guidance (as set out in the DRAFT business package supporting 2.8.0 taxonomy). In the taxonomy validations there is rule BV1989 for C0210 (Total Health LoB): {t: S.12.01.01.01, r: R0370, c: C0210} = sum({t: S.12.01.01.01, r: R0370, c: C0160; C0190; C0200}) We have two related questions: 1. Why is this validation a Warning (and not a Blocking)? Do you anticipate any scenarios where this should not hold (or is this just being cautious for the first year of implementation)? We have the same question regards BV1997 and total EPIFP in S.17.01.01 2. Why is there not an equivalent validation for C0150 (total other than Health), being: C0150 = sum(C0020,C0030,C0060,C0090,C0100)? Is there some difference between the two cases or would that relationship also be expected to hold?