On 17 May 2000 12:14:58 CDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Right now, we store security quotes mingled in with the other splits
> in a given security account. I'd like to consider the question of
> whether or not this information should be broken out into a separate
> database.
I agree with your reasons _to_ separate them.
> reasons against:
>
> - If there were ever a situation where the user wanted to have two
> securities with the same name, with different quote sources
> beacause they expected the information to be different from the
> two sources, then having a centralized quote archive wouldn't make
> sense, but when would this ever happen?
I personally pull rates from both Yahoo and from a Canadian stock price
database.
It would make some sense to include, as part of the quote, some indicator
of the data source.
If you permit having multiple "spot" rates within a given day, then there
should be no problem in having a rate pulled from Telenium at 10:45:32
kept distinct from another pulled from Yahoo at 10:45:35. If there _is_
ambiguity, it should be easy to "break the tie."
Likely by reporting the latest rate, always...
> - If the user likes to see the running total of how they were doing
> over time *in the ledger*. However, I'd tend to argue that that's
> really better left to the reporting/graphing infrastructure.
>
> The reason I bring this up is that I'm in the process of integrating
> getting quotes directly into gnucash (no more external program), so
> I'm thinking about this stuff right now.
>
> Thoughts?
I'd rather see the system take advantage of the fact that UNIX allows
multiple processes; I somewhat prefer the notion of having this handled
by an external program...
--
"Tooltips are the proof that icons don't work."
-- Stefaan A. Eeckels
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
