Was going to leave this as a doc comment on the cookbook, but it seems to be view-only.
In the beancount cookbook, and pervasively throughout the documentation, you recommend naming e.g. dividend income accounts with names like Income:US:ETrade:Dividends. This surprises me: I would expect you would prefer a name like Income:US:Dividends:ETrade instead. It's true that you will need to have these items broken out by account for tax reporting, but you want the totals by income/expense taxation category (dividend, P&L, wages, interest) as well, and I assume it's at least marginally more convenient to get reports for a level of hierarchy than for an arbitrary filter. (Of course it is easy to slice things up however I want when I need to; this is what drew me to beancount in the first place. So the question is really just about what makes for more useful/convenient defaults.) Am I missing an important use for which it's good to have income/expense category nested below, rather than above, account? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to beancount@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/ea588c4a-63ef-4349-b778-f21efb39e853%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
