> On Fri, 02 Jun 2000, tboldt wrote:
> > Under this view I "transfer" funds and "move" transactions. For
> > example, I "transferred funds" from account A to account B using the
> > register window for account A. Later, I decide that account was the wrong
> > source of the funds and account C should be the proper source. To the
> > non-professional I would "move" the transaction from A to C and gnucash
> > should take care of resetting the proper "from" account. A professional
> > accountant would just think, if I get your argument right, okay I change
> > the "Transfer From" window to read C instead of A and gnucash then takes
> > care of "moving" the transaction from the A register to the C register.
>
> I think that your view is more that of "single entry"/"double entry" rather
> than "professional accountant"/"non-professional".
>
> In single entry, you imply the transfer from the account which the register
> represents. In that context, "moving" the transaction to another register
> makes sense. However, you seem quite willing to "edit" the expense category.
> In reality, that is "moving" the transaction to a different expense account.
>
> In double entry, we don't make the distinction between asset accounts and
> expense categories. They are both accounts. Therefore, editing any part of
> the transaction makes sense. Changing an account is just changing an account.
I think this issue will go away with the next release, where the
'blank transaction' will go back to using a 'transfer' account field
instead of the direct field. This makes sense for entry, as you are
going to enter a transaction for account A into the register for
account A. Existing transactions will use the direct 'Account'
field.
dave
--
Gnucash Developer's List
To unsubscribe send empty email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
