Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
aeg via gnucash-user writes: [snip] > level, so I shall continue to use it for double entry bookkeeping > rather than double split bookkeeping. It is double-entry (even in basic mode) because you are entering both debits and credits. It is still double-entry even if you have 5 splits. This is another "term-of-art". > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. -derek -- Derek Atkins 617-623-3745 de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com Computer and Internet Security Consultant ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
I think the confusion is arising because the default view (well intentioned for simplicity for new users) is hiding the double-entry nature of the actual data and this necessitated special terms and definitions for ’simple transaction’ and ‘compound transaction’ and then someone decided to use the term ’split transaction’ instead for one of those and then for clarification, exacerbated the confusion with ‘multi-split transaction’ as a substitute for ‘compound transaction’. If we just abandon the use of ’split transaction’ (since they are all split at least once) and ‘multi-split transaction’ (since we have the defined ‘compound transaction’ to use) things might clear up a bit. Of course, the documentation is fine, this is just a communication and comprehension failing in a list conversation. On another note, while I have long known that mnemonics and abbreviations were used by programmers to save time (and storage space), I never considered how the time saved typing an extra letter, or few, more than made up for the small amount of time spent learning the command name and mapping it in my brain to the natural language term for what I’m trying to accomplish, especially considering I use some of those cryptic (to others) commands multiple times on a daily basis. Thanks for that tid-bit. Regards, Adrien > On Mar 24, 2019, at 11:42 AM, Michael or Penny Novack > wrote: > > On 3/23/2019 6:04 PM, aeg via gnucash-user wrote: >> Thank you to those who have tried to educate me on the use of the word >> "split" in GnuCash, but whilst I believe that I understand how it is being >> used, the reason for using such an ambiguous term remains puzzling when >> better alternatives exist. > Is the objection then just to the term "split" being used when going from the > simplified method of entry (usable for the vast majority of transactions > where only two accounts are involved) to the more general "journal view" form > of entry that can be used for any transaction? > > You are right in the sense that nothing is being "split". The developers > could have used something more descriptive like "enter in journal view". > > Do you understand that gnucash would allow you to enter even simple (just two > accounts affected) transactions in this more complicated way? Instead of > entering the second account in the space provided hit the "split" button (the > "change to journal view" button) and enter the second account on its own > line. In other words, the "simple" (unsplit) method of entry is simply a work > flow shortcut making entering the vast majority of transactions much > faster/easier. > > To those of us who learned bookkeeping in the "old days", first entering > transactions in the journal, what is happening with "split" is obvious. We > are entering transactions the "old fashioned way" and with the hit of the > key at the end doing the "post". > > Those of us who know the computer language c and unix know that strange (hard > to read shortened spellings) were used by the engineers at Bell Labs who > preferred shorter (less key strokes) even if they had to be memorized. Thus > "mount" and "umount" (had to remember, no first "n"). I heard that this is > because none of them could touch type. But also how engineer minds work, in > the long run, less time spent learning that "umount" was spelled that way > than all the times afterwards hitting that extra "n". > > Just think of "enter in journal view" as being spelled "split". > > Michael D Novack ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
While I don’t have an issue with the use of the term ’split’ as a noun (seems quite normal to me) after looking at my Accounting textbook, I see the authors simply refer to each debit/credit as an ‘entry’ which of course makes sense in light of the phrase ‘double-entry accounting.’ They however distinguish between ‘ledger entries’ which are those individual debits and credits in their respective accounts, and ‘journal entries’ which are to proceed posting to the ledgers in a formal ink-paper system. Since formal paper systems use a journal (and GnuCash has a virtual journal and substitutes ‘registers’ instead with a ’shortcut single line entry system') and all debits and credits are always visible there, the text does not have a distinction between transactions that have only two entries (one dr./one cr.) and those that have 3 or more. Regards, Adrien > On Mar 23, 2019, at 5:39 AM, Michael Hendry wrote: > >> On 22 Mar 2019, at 19:33, aeg via gnucash-user >> wrote: > > > -- > > I agree with Michael's points.A simple transaction consists of just one split > but two parts, and saying (pretending) that a simple transaction has two > splits is misleading. > I see no problems with the use of terms like 'simple transaction' (with one > split and two parts) or with 'compound transactions' (with 2+ splits and 3+ > parts), but it doesn't make sense to refer to the parts as splits. Why not > just use the term 'parts' or 'transaction parts' or even invent a new word > 'transparts'; (after all, GnuCash is a made up word too.) > Just because GnuCash developers previously defined the 'parts' of a > transaction as 'splits' doesn't mean that the definition shouldn't be changed > to make it clearer. > Kind regards,Alan > > > ___ > > Thanks for your support, Alan, > > also for inadvertently revealing that the terminology has confused you too! > > QED > > You say “A simple transaction consists of just one split…” - this is not true > - it’s clear from everyday use of GC that there are two splits in a simple > transaction, in other words that a split maps directly to what would be > called a Ledger Entry in paper-and-ink bookkeeping. Similarly, a compound > transaction is one with more than 2 splits. > > More confusion is added to the mix by the appearance of the term “Split > Transaction” in the Basic View of a register which includes a compound > transaction. This may be the reason for your errors above. > > As every transaction involves splits, this isn’t helpful. If it said > “Compound Transaction” it would be much easier to comprehend, and would not > need to cause problems for the underlying code or data. > > I appreciate Derek’s point that removing the term “split” from the code and > data would have consequences for future developers, and that the introduction > of “Ledger Entry” would be awkward, but with some minor changes to the code > and revision of the documentation this could all be resolved. > > For example, consider this section: > > "4.3. Simple vs. Split Transactions > > "Every transaction in GnuCash has at least two splits, but a transaction can > have more than two splits. A transaction with only two splits is called a > simple transaction, since it only involves the current account and a single > remote account. A transaction with three or more accounts is called a split > transaction. > > "When the register is in Basic view, you will see a summary of the splits > affecting the current account. For a simple transaction, the Transfer column > will display the other account from which money is transferred. For a split > transaction, the Transfer column will display -- Split Transaction --. You > can see the individual splits of each transaction by clicking the Split > button in the Toolbar while selecting the appropriate transaction.” > > I would suggest: > > “4.3 Simple vs. Compound Transactions > > "Every transaction in GnuCash has at least two entries, one recording the > source account for the cash, and the other its destination. These are the > equivalent of Ledger Entries in traditional bookkeeping, and are known as > “splits” in GnuCash. A two-split transaction is called a Simple Transaction. > > "It’s also possible to have more than two splits in a transaction, which is > called a Compound Transaction. > > "When the register is in Basic view, you will see a summary of the splits > affecting the current account. For a simple transaction, the Transfer column > will display the other account from which money is transferred. For a > compound transaction, the Transfer column will display -- Compound > Transaction --. You can see the individual splits of each transaction by > clicking the Split button in the Toolbar while selecting the appropriate > transaction.” > > > I think the implications for the code would be small, but the relevant > sections of the
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
snip FWIW - this old owl looks at every GnuCash transaction as having one source and one or more sinks; and doesn't give a hoot about splits, simple transactions, compound transactions inter alia. Have enjoyed the back and forth. Many thanks to the GnuCash developers, contributors and the members of the list. All the best from the Carson Valley, nvsoar ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Alan You have triggered a debate on a very sensitive topic, which is exciting! Hopefully, we will come to a consensus of opinion and then move forward together. David Carlson On Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:24 PM aeg via gnucash-user wrote: > Liz. > I've responded to your comments collectively in order because inserting > responses within quoted text has not worked properly on previous occasions, > so please bear with me... > >- I don't believe every term in English in ambiguous. >- There is no verb form of "split" present in the example I gave, > although it is true that the wood had split(v) at some time in the past.. >- I used "propagate" to mean that the split was forced to grow. >- The split itself has gone, only the effects of the split remain in > the form of uneven edges to the piece of wood. >- It is interesting to note that you think there is just a single split > at this stage because GnuCash would interpret it as two! >- Sawmills don't make logs by splitting. Logs are cut directly from > trees by sawing. Sawmills convert logs and trees into usable timber by > sawing; that's why they are called sawmills. > > Whilst I do respect everyone's point of view, it is clear that I've wasted > far too much valuable time trying to help eradicate confusing terminology > from GnuCash. I've clearly failed, but I do know that most of the > transactions I enter in GnuCash involve no splits at the user level, so I > shall continue to use it for double entry bookkeeping rather than double > split bookkeeping. > That's all from me on this topic you'll no doubt be relieved to know!. > Kind regards, > Alan > > > > Thank you to those who have tried to educate me on the use of the > > word "split" in GnuCash, but whilst I believe that I understand how > > it is being used, the reason for using such an ambiguous term remains > > puzzling when better alternatives exist. > Every term in English is ambiguous - it's the nature of the language > and why jokes involving language are so prominent. > > > > I have a piece of wood that > > has a split in it caused by uneven shrinkage. It is one piece of wood > > with one split. > Split - noun. > Don't forget Split - verb > > > > If I choose to propagate that split > why did you choose "propagate" rather than "split" > > > by forcing a > > wedge or axe into it, I end up with two pieces of wood and the split > > suddenly disappears. > No, the split has now enlarged to a point at which you can ignore it. > > > > The split has not magically turned into two splits > No, there is no magic. You still have a single split, but instead of it > being partial it is a complete split. > > > > and if I plane the edges of the two pieces of wood there will > > be no evidence that the split ever existed. > Cosmetic only. > We all know that it didn't grow like that, it was part of a bigger > whole, and that at the sawmill they made multiple splits to make logs. > > > Alan, > we are trying to present a number of different points of view, please > look at these different points of view. > > Liz > > > -- > > > ___ > gnucash-user mailing list > gnucash-user@gnucash.org > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. > - > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. > ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Liz. I've responded to your comments collectively in order because inserting responses within quoted text has not worked properly on previous occasions, so please bear with me... - I don't believe every term in English in ambiguous. - There is no verb form of "split" present in the example I gave, although it is true that the wood had split(v) at some time in the past.. - I used "propagate" to mean that the split was forced to grow. - The split itself has gone, only the effects of the split remain in the form of uneven edges to the piece of wood. - It is interesting to note that you think there is just a single split at this stage because GnuCash would interpret it as two! - Sawmills don't make logs by splitting. Logs are cut directly from trees by sawing. Sawmills convert logs and trees into usable timber by sawing; that's why they are called sawmills. Whilst I do respect everyone's point of view, it is clear that I've wasted far too much valuable time trying to help eradicate confusing terminology from GnuCash. I've clearly failed, but I do know that most of the transactions I enter in GnuCash involve no splits at the user level, so I shall continue to use it for double entry bookkeeping rather than double split bookkeeping. That's all from me on this topic you'll no doubt be relieved to know!. Kind regards, Alan > Thank you to those who have tried to educate me on the use of the > word "split" in GnuCash, but whilst I believe that I understand how > it is being used, the reason for using such an ambiguous term remains > puzzling when better alternatives exist. Every term in English is ambiguous - it's the nature of the language and why jokes involving language are so prominent. > I have a piece of wood that > has a split in it caused by uneven shrinkage. It is one piece of wood > with one split. Split - noun. Don't forget Split - verb > If I choose to propagate that split why did you choose "propagate" rather than "split" > by forcing a > wedge or axe into it, I end up with two pieces of wood and the split > suddenly disappears. No, the split has now enlarged to a point at which you can ignore it. > The split has not magically turned into two splits No, there is no magic. You still have a single split, but instead of it being partial it is a complete split. > and if I plane the edges of the two pieces of wood there will > be no evidence that the split ever existed. Cosmetic only. We all know that it didn't grow like that, it was part of a bigger whole, and that at the sawmill they made multiple splits to make logs. Alan, we are trying to present a number of different points of view, please look at these different points of view. Liz -- ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
On 3/23/2019 6:04 PM, aeg via gnucash-user wrote: Thank you to those who have tried to educate me on the use of the word "split" in GnuCash, but whilst I believe that I understand how it is being used, the reason for using such an ambiguous term remains puzzling when better alternatives exist. Is the objection then just to the term "split" being used when going from the simplified method of entry (usable for the vast majority of transactions where only two accounts are involved) to the more general "journal view" form of entry that can be used for any transaction? You are right in the sense that nothing is being "split". The developers could have used something more descriptive like "enter in journal view". Do you understand that gnucash would allow you to enter even simple (just two accounts affected) transactions in this more complicated way? Instead of entering the second account in the space provided hit the "split" button (the "change to journal view" button) and enter the second account on its own line. In other words, the "simple" (unsplit) method of entry is simply a work flow shortcut making entering the vast majority of transactions much faster/easier. To those of us who learned bookkeeping in the "old days", first entering transactions in the journal, what is happening with "split" is obvious. We are entering transactions the "old fashioned way" and with the hit of the key at the end doing the "post". Those of us who know the computer language c and unix know that strange (hard to read shortened spellings) were used by the engineers at Bell Labs who preferred shorter (less key strokes) even if they had to be memorized. Thus "mount" and "umount" (had to remember, no first "n"). I heard that this is because none of them could touch type. But also how engineer minds work, in the long run, less time spent learning that "umount" was spelled that way than all the times afterwards hitting that extra "n". Just think of "enter in journal view" as being spelled "split". Michael D Novack ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Michael et al,
I suspect that whether we use a term like entry or split, we will no doubt find
circumstances in which the usage can
become confusing or ambiguous. Entry can also mean a number of different things
depending upon the context. What is
perhaps more important is to define what is meant by such a term when used in
GnuCash and define the context in which
that definition applies. Then we can provide back references to that definition
in the documentation so what is meant is
clear. I personally found split confusing when I first came across it as there
were several other common usages in the
financial literature, but I quickly moved past that once I had established a
definition and context for that definition
in my head. Split has also made it into Intuit's usage as well (equally
undefined)
I think 20 years of history is sufficient reason to stay with the current usage
(which is also prevalent throughout the
code base) provided we have an unambiguous definition for split and the context
in which it applies in the documentation
and adequate reference to that definition throughout the documentation.
David Cousens
On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 18:17 +, Michael Hendry wrote:
> > On 21 Mar 2019, at 15:15, Adrien Monteleone
> > wrote:
> >
> > I’m not sure ‘ledger entry’ is a prime choice either. If we were to
> > consider the pen and paper world, this is done
> > as a ‘journal entry’ but that entry always has two components (debit and
> > credit) with at minimum two accounts
> > involved. I’m going to dig up my accounting textbook and see how they
> > reference the entries but I’m going to hazard
> > an early guess that there is no mention of the individual parts of the
> > transaction other than debit/credit.
>
> Just checked my ancient primer, which starts a new business with a
> contribution of £3000 of capital from John Brown to
> the Cash Account.
>
> Two ledger pages are created, one called “Cash Account” numbered “L1" and the
> other “Capital Account - John Brown”
> numbered “L2”.
>
> On the Debit side of L1 there is a entry recording Capital of £3000 received
> from L2.
>
> On the Credit side of L2 there is a corresponding entry of a transfer of Cash
> to L1.
>
> These two separate but linked “Ledger Entries" make up the one “Transaction".
>
> I’d be surprised if the overall process is different in the US, but the
> nomenclature might well diverge.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adrien
> >
> > > On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:46 AM, D via gnucash-user
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple and
> > > compound transaction, and then say a
> > > simple transaction is a special case compound transaction. Then we're
> > > back at defining the difference between,
> > > say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split" transaction, which
> > > we're trying to move away from as justifiably
> > > confusing.
> > >
> > > Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems like
> > > enough. Perhaps the explanation of the
> > > technical aspects of this (i.e., the structure of a two sided simple, as
> > > opposed to an n-sided {n>2} compound
> > > transaction), could use the term "split," as it is defined by Gnucash.
> > > This would disambiguate the use of the
> > > term "split," such that it would only be used for this specific case.
> > >
> > > Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
> > >
> > > Perhaps we need a translation from American English to British English...
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > gnucash-user mailing list
> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
>
>
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
--
Dr David R Cousens
B.Sc, M.Prof. Acc., Ph.D., G.C.Ed
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 22:04:55 + (UTC) aeg via gnucash-user wrote: > Thank you to those who have tried to educate me on the use of the > word "split" in GnuCash, but whilst I believe that I understand how > it is being used, the reason for using such an ambiguous term remains > puzzling when better alternatives exist. Every term in English is ambiguous - it's the nature of the language and why jokes involving language are so prominent. > I have a piece of wood that > has a split in it caused by uneven shrinkage. It is one piece of wood > with one split. Split - noun. Don't forget Split - verb > If I choose to propagate that split why did you choose "propagate" rather than "split" > by forcing a > wedge or axe into it, I end up with two pieces of wood and the split > suddenly disappears. No, the split has now enlarged to a point at which you can ignore it. > The split has not magically turned into two splits No, there is no magic. You still have a single split, but instead of it being partial it is a complete split. > and if I plane the edges of the two pieces of wood there will > be no evidence that the split ever existed. Cosmetic only. We all know that it didn't grow like that, it was part of a bigger whole, and that at the sawmill they made multiple splits to make logs. Alan, we are trying to present a number of different points of view, please look at these different points of view. Liz ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Thank you to those who have tried to educate me on the use of the word "split" in GnuCash, but whilst I believe that I understand how it is being used, the reason for using such an ambiguous term remains puzzling when better alternatives exist. I have a piece of wood that has a split in it caused by uneven shrinkage. It is one piece of wood with one split. If I choose to propagate that split by forcing a wedge or axe into it, I end up with two pieces of wood and the split suddenly disappears. The split has not magically turned into two splits and if I plane the edges of the two pieces of wood there will be no evidence that the split ever existed. I understand that GnuCash has been developed on the basis of double entry bookkeeping, which I believe gets its name from the fact that the details of every transaction are entered at least twice; I regard this as duplicated entry rather than split entry. For a simple transaction there is no splitting involved; all of the money passes from one account to another and is simply recorded in both accounts. The only transactions involving splits are those where a sum of money leaves the source account and is shared between two (or more) destination accounts or where the money from two (or more) source accounts passes to one destination account; these could truthfully be thought of as a split transactions or compound transactions. Most confusion arises from using the word "split" to describe every ledger entry, regardless of whether any splitting has been done. Using the term "ledger entry" or simply "entry" to describe the constituent parts of a transaction works consistently, whereas using the term "split" to describe the same thing does not. The term "double entry bookkeeping" makes sense, whereas the term "double split bookkeeping" does not, but that is how GnuCash appears to be defined. Despite my comments above, I do like using GnuCash and appreciate the efforts made by its developers, but whenever I try to encourage others to use it, the perceived steep learning curve is the first concern and the use of confusing terminology doesn't help. Kind regards, Alan ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Forgive me, but this seems like much ado about nothing. For me the explanation is simple. In every transaction there is a source account for the cash being distributed and one or more destination accounts where the cash is distributed to. It is proper to say when there is more than one destination account that you are splitting the cash into multiple destination accounts or you are dividing the cash into multiple destination accounts. Whether the term is splitting or dividing or another suitable word, it is a compound transaction when there is more than one destination account. To me I am just entering a transaction into the system and sometimes the cash is divided between multiple destination accounts. I really do not care what you call the transaction as long as I understand the principle behind what is going on. Isn’t language and the workings of the human mind wonderful? Jack -Original Message- From: gnucash-user On Behalf Of GTI .H Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2019 11:19 AM To: gnucash-user Subject: Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?) I'm sorry for the contrary provisions, but this is the most natural of what should be simple transactions and split transactions: See the figure: [image: Single-Split Transaction.JPG] Anything out of it only makes sense for non-accounting contexts and it's a arm wrestling of professionals of different areas. -- Regards GTI ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
I'm sorry for the contrary provisions, but this is the most natural of what should be simple transactions and split transactions: See the figure: [image: Single-Split Transaction.JPG] Anything out of it only makes sense for non-accounting contexts and it's a arm wrestling of professionals of different areas. -- Regards GTI ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
I think this dispute has more to do with how we begin to learn about transactions in double entry bookkeeping and that gnucash (and yes, most equivalent "direct entry into the ledger" alternatives) begins with a SIMPLIFIED entry that makes it quick/easy to enter the overwhelming majority of transactions. Let's go back to the way double entry was done, first entering transactions into a "journal" and then later posting these to the ledger. We can then define a transaction as: a date, optionally a check number or transaction number one OR MORE lines of debits, each with the account being debited and the amount one OR MORE lines of credits, each with the account being credited and the amount and optional description of this transaction < with the condition that the total of the debit amounts and the total of credit amounts must be the same> This would then get posted to the ledger, each of those debit or credit lines being a line in that ledger account. Now in gnucash (and yes, in most alternatives) the journal is virtual. You begin entering directly in ANY of the affected accounts. Since MOST transactions have only one other account being affected, the entry process allows you to specify that on the same line. IF (for some reason) you wanted to see the journal, there is a report you can run << aside: in the old days, transcription errors while manually posting were the bulk of the the errors that had to be painstakingly found -- there were a number of "tricks" you had to learn to help you find the error >> Because THIS (beginning with the simplest possible transaction form) is how we begin entering with gnucash (and equivalents) we have a PROCESS to switch to the more general form of transaction where there is more than one debit, more than one credit, or both. That is called SPLIT. When you hit the split button, it brings up a view of what the JOURNAL entry would look like. All we are splitting is the view of a transaction form one where see a single line (with one debit and one credit) to a form where each debit and each credit appears on its own line. The alternative software might call this process something else (say "switch to journal view" instead of "split" but is doing the same thing. In other words, this is a "work flow" matter. The developers (correctly) decided to make it quick and easy to enter the overwhelming majority of transactions instead of always requiring the process needed for the rarer general case transaction. Michael D Novack ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
> On 22 Mar 2019, at 19:33, aeg via gnucash-user > wrote: -- I agree with Michael's points.A simple transaction consists of just one split but two parts, and saying (pretending) that a simple transaction has two splits is misleading. I see no problems with the use of terms like 'simple transaction' (with one split and two parts) or with 'compound transactions' (with 2+ splits and 3+ parts), but it doesn't make sense to refer to the parts as splits. Why not just use the term 'parts' or 'transaction parts' or even invent a new word 'transparts'; (after all, GnuCash is a made up word too.) Just because GnuCash developers previously defined the 'parts' of a transaction as 'splits' doesn't mean that the definition shouldn't be changed to make it clearer. Kind regards,Alan ___ Thanks for your support, Alan, also for inadvertently revealing that the terminology has confused you too! QED You say “A simple transaction consists of just one split…” - this is not true - it’s clear from everyday use of GC that there are two splits in a simple transaction, in other words that a split maps directly to what would be called a Ledger Entry in paper-and-ink bookkeeping. Similarly, a compound transaction is one with more than 2 splits. More confusion is added to the mix by the appearance of the term “Split Transaction” in the Basic View of a register which includes a compound transaction. This may be the reason for your errors above. As every transaction involves splits, this isn’t helpful. If it said “Compound Transaction” it would be much easier to comprehend, and would not need to cause problems for the underlying code or data. I appreciate Derek’s point that removing the term “split” from the code and data would have consequences for future developers, and that the introduction of “Ledger Entry” would be awkward, but with some minor changes to the code and revision of the documentation this could all be resolved. For example, consider this section: "4.3. Simple vs. Split Transactions "Every transaction in GnuCash has at least two splits, but a transaction can have more than two splits. A transaction with only two splits is called a simple transaction, since it only involves the current account and a single remote account. A transaction with three or more accounts is called a split transaction. "When the register is in Basic view, you will see a summary of the splits affecting the current account. For a simple transaction, the Transfer column will display the other account from which money is transferred. For a split transaction, the Transfer column will display -- Split Transaction --. You can see the individual splits of each transaction by clicking the Split button in the Toolbar while selecting the appropriate transaction.” I would suggest: “4.3 Simple vs. Compound Transactions "Every transaction in GnuCash has at least two entries, one recording the source account for the cash, and the other its destination. These are the equivalent of Ledger Entries in traditional bookkeeping, and are known as “splits” in GnuCash. A two-split transaction is called a Simple Transaction. "It’s also possible to have more than two splits in a transaction, which is called a Compound Transaction. "When the register is in Basic view, you will see a summary of the splits affecting the current account. For a simple transaction, the Transfer column will display the other account from which money is transferred. For a compound transaction, the Transfer column will display -- Compound Transaction --. You can see the individual splits of each transaction by clicking the Split button in the Toolbar while selecting the appropriate transaction.” I think the implications for the code would be small, but the relevant sections of the documentation would have to be carefully reviewed. Regards, Michael (Still hopeful of generating more light than heat) ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
I'll throw some more confusion I'm afraid. I'd think a Split is somewhat unique to GnuCash, for better or for worse. I don't think there's an equivalent word in general usage. If we define Split as a "that which links Transactions to Accounts" then there's no confusion here. Technically a Transaction can have 1 Split - in an account register, input a date, description/memo/notes, and leave the rest blank -- presto, a single-split transaction with no account, no amount or amount = 0, and the engine will accept it. This single-split transaction will appear in the Transaction Report, and causes no harm. You can use this for annotating accounts "01/01/2018 - new year - new tenant moves in - monthly $500 rent expected". Does any other bookkeeping software allow this? A 2-Split transaction is the most common transfer involving 2 separate accounts, and is displayed as a shortcut for newbies. A 3-Split (or more links 3 accounts or more together), useful for complex transfers involving taxes withheld, or mortgage/capital/interest repayments, or complex payroll entries. I don't think there's a compelling argument to rename 20 years of history... Thanks for your support, Alan, > > and also for the fact that your response demonstrates the > incomprehensibility of the terminology! > > QED > > You say “A simple transaction consists of just one split…” This is not the > case - a simple transaction involves two splits. Similarly, a compound > transaction involves 3 or more splits. > > The situation isn’t helped by the use of the term “Split Transaction” > which appears in a register where there is a transaction with more than 2 > splits. Does this mean (using Split as a noun) that the transaction is made > up from splits, or (using it as a past participle) that the transaction is > in a state of having been split. Replacing this with “Compound Transaction” > would make it clear that there is more to see while not having any > fundamental affect on underlying code or data. > > Regards, > > Michael > > > > > ___ > gnucash-user mailing list > gnucash-user@gnucash.org > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. > - > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. > ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
> On 22 Mar 2019, at 19:33, aeg via gnucash-user > wrote: -- I agree with Michael's points.A simple transaction consists of just one split but two parts, and saying (pretending) that a simple transaction has two splits is misleading. I see no problems with the use of terms like 'simple transaction' (with one split and two parts) or with 'compound transactions' (with 2+ splits and 3+ parts), but it doesn't make sense to refer to the parts as splits. Why not just use the term 'parts' or 'transaction parts' or even invent a new word 'transparts'; (after all, GnuCash is a made up word too.) Just because GnuCash developers previously defined the 'parts' of a transaction as 'splits' doesn't mean that the definition shouldn't be changed to make it clearer. Kind regards,Alan ___ Thanks for your support, Alan, and also for the fact that your response demonstrates the incomprehensibility of the terminology! QED You say “A simple transaction consists of just one split…” This is not the case - a simple transaction involves two splits. Similarly, a compound transaction involves 3 or more splits. The situation isn’t helped by the use of the term “Split Transaction” which appears in a register where there is a transaction with more than 2 splits. Does this mean (using Split as a noun) that the transaction is made up from splits, or (using it as a past participle) that the transaction is in a state of having been split. Replacing this with “Compound Transaction” would make it clear that there is more to see while not having any fundamental affect on underlying code or data. Regards, Michael ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Hi Derek, Thank you for your explanation. I've given this further thought overnight and, although I understand your thinking, your analogy has helped me see where confusion might have arisen. When you say "split the wood in two" you are using split(v), not split(n).Calling each piece of the result a split(n) is perfectly reasonable,which is what GnuCash does. If I have a pile of logs that I want to use as firewood, it might be necessary to split(v) them first. I then have a pile of split logs where "split" is being used as an adjective. "Split logs" in the complete term whereas you have chosen to abbreviate it to split(n), which makes no sense if used on its own, as in "I have a pile of splits". It appears that that is what has happened to the use of split in GnuCash and "split transaction" has been abbreviated to "split", which long-term users have got used to it. Geert's suggested use of the word "entry" for the individual parts of a transaction would surely make sense to all users and still allow for the use of "split entry transaction" when referring to the whole transaction. Kind regards, Alan ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 21:21:52 +0100 Geert Janssens wrote: > > Not saying we CAN'T do it, but seriously, how many words in the > > English language have both a verb and a noun and can mean slightly > > different things? (cheating answer: many). > > > There are many. The confusion however comes from the fact that split > (noun) is ambiguous in itself. It sometimes means the parts you get > after splitting something (like in your wine example), and sometimes > it refers to the gap between the pieces instead. The latter meaning > is clearly the more obvious one for Micheal and Alan. So if we can > avoid this confusion by using another term that could make gnucash > easier to learn. Geert We can't fix English, it's a moving target. “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.” ― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
#yiv5052015078 p, #yiv5052015078 li {white-space:pre-wrap;}Op vrijdag 22 maart
2019 21:00:02 CET schreef Derek Atkins:> > Why not just use the term 'parts' or
'transaction parts' or even invent a> > new word 'transparts'; (after all,
GnuCash is a made up word too.)> > Just because GnuCash developers previously
defined the 'parts' of a> > transaction as 'splits' doesn't mean that the
definition shouldn't be> > changed to make it clearer.> > The data file
contains "Splits". Having different terms in the UI vs the> underlying data is
a way to cause irreperable brain damage down the road> when someone not alive
today becomes a developer in a couple decades and> tries to mentally map a
Foobob to a Split and doesn't understand why the> name was changed.> This is a
valid point. It only makes sense to change the term if it happens on all
levels. That's what I hinted at in one of my first replies (that it would be
hard to make this change and potentially create an extra burden on our
translators). > Not saying we CAN'T do it, but seriously, how many words in the
English> language have both a verb and a noun and can mean slightly different>
things? (cheating answer: many).> There are many. The confusion however comes
from the fact that split (noun) is ambiguous in itself. It sometimes means the
parts you get after splitting something (like in your wine example), and
sometimes it refers to the gap between the pieces instead. The latter meaning
is clearly the more obvious one for Micheal and Alan. So if we can avoid this
confusion by using another term that could make gnucash easier to learn.
Pondering it some more among a few developers the term "entry" without the
explicit "ledger" comes up as the most likely alternative so far. It can be
disambiguated in certain contexts with account, invoice, bill,... Regards, Geert
Yes, I take the points you both make and Geert, yes, the term 'entry' seems
like a good alternative for better clarity.
Alan
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Op vrijdag 22 maart 2019 21:00:02 CET schreef Derek Atkins: > > Why not just use the term 'parts' or 'transaction parts' or even invent a > > new word 'transparts'; (after all, GnuCash is a made up word too.) > > Just because GnuCash developers previously defined the 'parts' of a > > transaction as 'splits' doesn't mean that the definition shouldn't be > > changed to make it clearer. > > The data file contains "Splits". Having different terms in the UI vs the > underlying data is a way to cause irreperable brain damage down the road > when someone not alive today becomes a developer in a couple decades and > tries to mentally map a Foobob to a Split and doesn't understand why the > name was changed. > This is a valid point. It only makes sense to change the term if it happens on all levels. That's what I hinted at in one of my first replies (that it would be hard to make this change and potentially create an extra burden on our translators). > Not saying we CAN'T do it, but seriously, how many words in the English > language have both a verb and a noun and can mean slightly different > things? (cheating answer: many). > There are many. The confusion however comes from the fact that split (noun) is ambiguous in itself. It sometimes means the parts you get after splitting something (like in your wine example), and sometimes it refers to the gap between the pieces instead. The latter meaning is clearly the more obvious one for Micheal and Alan. So if we can avoid this confusion by using another term that could make gnucash easier to learn. Pondering it some more among a few developers the term "entry" without the explicit "ledger" comes up as the most likely alternative so far. It can be disambiguated in certain contexts with account, invoice, bill,... Regards, Geert ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Derek, I think you have defined the reason that the term 'split' should remain in use as it presently is in GNUcash. On 3/22/2019 2:00 PM, Derek Atkins wrote: You are confusing the VERB split -- the act of splitting two things into pieces -- and the NOUN split, which are the results of the splitting. While you are correct that a simple transaction has been split(v) only once, that does not imply that it is made of one one split(n). It is absolutely reasonable to use the same word to mean (slightly) different things as a verb and as a noun. It's also quite clear from context (at least most of the time) whether you are using split(v) or split(n). ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Hi Alan, On Fri, March 22, 2019 3:33 pm, aeg via gnucash-user wrote: > If I might comment on this topic, might thoughts are below Michael's... > [snip] > I agree with Michael's points.A simple transaction consists of just one > split but two parts, and saying (pretending) that a simple transaction has > two splits is misleading. You are confusing the VERB split -- the act of splitting two things into pieces -- and the NOUN split, which are the results of the splitting. While you are correct that a simple transaction has been split(v) only once, that does not imply that it is made of one one split(n). It is absolutely reasonable to use the same word to mean (slightly) different things as a verb and as a noun. It's also quite clear from context (at least most of the time) whether you are using split(v) or split(n). When you say "split the wood in two" you are using split(v), not split(n). Calling each piece of the result a split(n) is perfectly reasonable, which is what GnuCash does. Have you ever heard the term "wine split"? It refers to a 187ml bottle of wine, which is the result of splitting up a 750ml bottle into 4 parts, or a 350ml bottle into two. Are you going to argue that a wine split (which is yet another term-of-art) is wrong and go tilt at the wine industry windmill next? ;-) > I see no problems with the use of terms like 'simple transaction' (with > one split and two parts) or with 'compound transactions' (with 2+ splits > and 3+ parts), but it doesn't make sense to refer to the parts as splits. Why not? split(n) is a perfectly reasonable phrase. And again you are confusing split(v) with split(n), which is going to cause even more confusion. > Why not just use the term 'parts' or 'transaction parts' or even invent a > new word 'transparts'; (after all, GnuCash is a made up word too.) > Just because GnuCash developers previously defined the 'parts' of a > transaction as 'splits' doesn't mean that the definition shouldn't be > changed to make it clearer. The data file contains "Splits". Having different terms in the UI vs the underlying data is a way to cause irreperable brain damage down the road when someone not alive today becomes a developer in a couple decades and tries to mentally map a Foobob to a Split and doesn't understand why the name was changed. Not saying we CAN'T do it, but seriously, how many words in the English language have both a verb and a noun and can mean slightly different things? (cheating answer: many). Have a good weekend! > Kind regards,Alan > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. -derek -- Derek Atkins 617-623-3745 de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com Computer and Internet Security Consultant ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
If I might comment on this topic, might thoughts are below Michael's...
--
> On 22 Mar 2019, at 15:10, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
> D writes:
>
>> It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple
>> and compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a
>> special case compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the
>> difference between, say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split"
>> transaction, which we're trying to move away from as justifiably
>> confusing.
>
> The difference is "exactly 2 splits" vs "more than 2 splits".
>
> Simple tranaction: exactly 2 splits. The basic view mode in the
> ledger lets you enter these simply, and the Transfer field shows the
> "other" account.
>
> Compound transaction: > 2 splits. The Transfer field shows "Split
> Transaction" and you must expand the transaction to see the other
> accounts.
>
> Those ARE the definitions. If you don't like them, well, I'm sorry, but
> it's like saying you don't like the sky being Blue and would prefer if
> it was purple with pink polka dots.
>
> The fact remains, a simple transaction *is* a special case of a compound
> transaction as far as the UI is concerned. If you expand a simple
> transaction you'll see both splits.
>
>> Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems
>> like enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this
>> (i.e., the structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided
>> {n>2} compound transaction), could use the term "split," as it is
>> defined by Gnucash. This would disambiguate the use of the term
>> "split," such that it would only be used for this specific case.
>
> I am fine with that approach. In my mind it's always clear, tho, that
> "split transaction" implies "compound transaction", and "transaction
> splits" are the individual entries that tie the transaction to each
> account. But whatever, I've only been using these terms within gnucash
> for 20 years now. What do I know? :)
Well, and with the greatest respect, could it be that you?ve grown up with it
so you don?t see the potential for confusion?
To recap: I?ve been using Gnucash for 9 years, and I?ve managed to cope with
?splits? without looking at the definitions too closely.
I don?t use the CSV importer, and it wasn?t until there was a thread about
multi-splits and the CSV importer that I tried to get my head around the
nomenclature - and found it confusing.
To me, the term ?split transaction? implies "a transaction that has been split?
as opposed to ?a transaction that is made up from splits?, and it says nothing
about whether the transaction itself is Simple or Compound.
Although a molecule of carbon monoxide is made up from an atom each of carbon
and oxygen, I wouldn?t refer to either of these atoms as a split.
>
>> Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
>
> Why?
Good question!
The ledger entry is the atom from which transactions are made; the problem is
that GC?s user interface (very helpfully) facilitates the direct creation of
molecules.
>
> -derek
I realise that the concept of splits is in-with-the-bricks of Gnucash, and that
it wouldn?t be easy to disengage from its use. Now that I have worked out what
it means, it shouldn?t give me any more trouble.
I should probably say no more.
Regards,
Michael
--
I agree with Michael's points.A simple transaction consists of just one split
but two parts, and saying (pretending) that a simple transaction has two splits
is misleading.
I see no problems with the use of terms like 'simple transaction' (with one
split and two parts) or with 'compound transactions' (with 2+ splits and 3+
parts), but it doesn't make sense to refer to the parts as splits. Why not just
use the term 'parts' or 'transaction parts' or even invent a new word
'transparts'; (after all, GnuCash is a made up word too.)
Just because GnuCash developers previously defined the 'parts' of a transaction
as 'splits' doesn't mean that the definition shouldn't be changed to make it
clearer.
Kind regards,Alan
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
> On 22 Mar 2019, at 15:10, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
> D writes:
>
>> It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple
>> and compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a
>> special case compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the
>> difference between, say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split"
>> transaction, which we're trying to move away from as justifiably
>> confusing.
>
> The difference is "exactly 2 splits" vs "more than 2 splits".
>
> Simple tranaction: exactly 2 splits. The basic view mode in the
> ledger lets you enter these simply, and the Transfer field shows the
> "other" account.
>
> Compound transaction: > 2 splits. The Transfer field shows "Split
> Transaction" and you must expand the transaction to see the other
> accounts.
>
> Those ARE the definitions. If you don't like them, well, I'm sorry, but
> it's like saying you don't like the sky being Blue and would prefer if
> it was purple with pink polka dots.
>
> The fact remains, a simple transaction *is* a special case of a compound
> transaction as far as the UI is concerned. If you expand a simple
> transaction you'll see both splits.
>
>> Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems
>> like enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this
>> (i.e., the structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided
>> {n>2} compound transaction), could use the term "split," as it is
>> defined by Gnucash. This would disambiguate the use of the term
>> "split," such that it would only be used for this specific case.
>
> I am fine with that approach. In my mind it's always clear, tho, that
> "split transaction" implies "compound transaction", and "transaction
> splits" are the individual entries that tie the transaction to each
> account. But whatever, I've only been using these terms within gnucash
> for 20 years now. What do I know? :)
Well, and with the greatest respect, could it be that you’ve grown up with it
so you don’t see the potential for confusion?
To recap: I’ve been using Gnucash for 9 years, and I’ve managed to cope with
“splits” without looking at the definitions too closely.
I don’t use the CSV importer, and it wasn’t until there was a thread about
multi-splits and the CSV importer that I tried to get my head around the
nomenclature - and found it confusing.
To me, the term “split transaction” implies "a transaction that has been split”
as opposed to “a transaction that is made up from splits”, and it says nothing
about whether the transaction itself is Simple or Compound.
Although a molecule of carbon monoxide is made up from an atom each of carbon
and oxygen, I wouldn’t refer to either of these atoms as a split.
>
>> Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
>
> Why?
Good question!
The ledger entry is the atom from which transactions are made; the problem is
that GC’s user interface (very helpfully) facilitates the direct creation of
molecules.
>
> -derek
I realise that the concept of splits is in-with-the-bricks of Gnucash, and that
it wouldn’t be easy to disengage from its use. Now that I have worked out what
it means, it shouldn’t give me any more trouble.
I should probably say no more.
Regards,
Michael
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
D writes:
> It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple
> and compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a
> special case compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the
> difference between, say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split"
> transaction, which we're trying to move away from as justifiably
> confusing.
The difference is "exactly 2 splits" vs "more than 2 splits".
Simple tranaction: exactly 2 splits. The basic view mode in the
ledger lets you enter these simply, and the Transfer field shows the
"other" account.
Compound transaction: > 2 splits. The Transfer field shows "Split
Transaction" and you must expand the transaction to see the other
accounts.
Those ARE the definitions. If you don't like them, well, I'm sorry, but
it's like saying you don't like the sky being Blue and would prefer if
it was purple with pink polka dots.
The fact remains, a simple transaction *is* a special case of a compound
transaction as far as the UI is concerned. If you expand a simple
transaction you'll see both splits.
> Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems
> like enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this
> (i.e., the structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided
> {n>2} compound transaction), could use the term "split," as it is
> defined by Gnucash. This would disambiguate the use of the term
> "split," such that it would only be used for this specific case.
I am fine with that approach. In my mind it's always clear, tho, that
"split transaction" implies "compound transaction", and "transaction
splits" are the individual entries that tie the transaction to each
account. But whatever, I've only been using these terms within gnucash
for 20 years now. What do I know? :)
> Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
Why?
-derek
--
Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com
Computer and Internet Security Consultant
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Perhaps this interest. The meaning of "Split" was also addressed here: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GNC-Import-CSV-Multi-currency-tp4705312p4705345.html -- Regards GTI Em qua, 20 de mar de 2019 às 08:36, Michael Hendry escreveu: > > On 20 Mar 2019, at 10:52, Geert Janssens > wrote: > > > > Op woensdag 20 maart 2019 10:51:55 CET schreef Michael Hendry: > >> Which supports my contention that the use of the term “split” for a > Ledger > >> Entry causes confusion. > >> > > Fair enough. As I said if there's a concise yet more clear term to use > I'm > > happy to switch to it. > > > > Personally I'm not convinced yet "Ledger Entry" would be that > replacement. > > Surely it would appeal to people with an accounting background, but it > > doesn't feel like very intuitive for the casual user just wishing to > keep > > track of its personal finances in GnuCash. > > I agree, “Ledger Entry” is a bit clunky, but the casual user has to have > (at least) a nodding acquaintance with double-entry bookkeeping to be able > to use Gnucash. > > If you look in any book-keeping primer, you’ll find a definition of a > Ledger Entry, but you won’t find a “split” defined there. > > > As English is not my native > > language that may be a translation issue though. However perhaps more > informal > > terminology exists to describe subparts of a transaction ? > > I haven’t come across such a term, but maybe I don’t get out enough? > > > > > In addition it seems to me this thread has now evolved to discussing two > > distinct terminology issues: > > * the use of the word "split" in itself > > * the use of the term "multi" in "multi-split" to mean "more than two" > rather > > than "two or more”. > > Indeed - I’ve altered the subject line. > > > > >> Would anyone think it odd that a different process would be required > when > >> importing a compound transaction than when importing a simple one? > >> > > I think that depends on the input source format: csv is generic and > doesn't > > strictly define how to encode accounting data. > > > > GnuCash tries cater for as many formats as possible. So it offers a way > to > > import csv files with only one transaction per line or a csv file where > each > > line consists of one ledger entry/split and hence transaction can span > > multiple lines. > > So the choice is between importing “Simple Transactions” and “Compound > Transactions”, with a two-line simple transaction as a special case of a > compound transaction. > > > > > As GnuCash doesn't define the input sources (those come from banks, a > > spreadsheet, another accounting application,...) I don't see how that > could be > > covered with only one import interface. > > Agreed - the user would need to specify the appropriate format at import > time if the importing software can’t determine it by inspection. > > > > > Regards, > > > > Geert > > Regards, > > Michael > > ___ > gnucash-user mailing list > gnucash-user@gnucash.org > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. > - > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
> On 21 Mar 2019, at 15:15, Adrien Monteleone
> wrote:
>
> I’m not sure ‘ledger entry’ is a prime choice either. If we were to consider
> the pen and paper world, this is done as a ‘journal entry’ but that entry
> always has two components (debit and credit) with at minimum two accounts
> involved. I’m going to dig up my accounting textbook and see how they
> reference the entries but I’m going to hazard an early guess that there is no
> mention of the individual parts of the transaction other than debit/credit.
Just checked my ancient primer, which starts a new business with a contribution
of £3000 of capital from John Brown to the Cash Account.
Two ledger pages are created, one called “Cash Account” numbered “L1" and the
other “Capital Account - John Brown” numbered “L2”.
On the Debit side of L1 there is a entry recording Capital of £3000 received
from L2.
On the Credit side of L2 there is a corresponding entry of a transfer of Cash
to L1.
These two separate but linked “Ledger Entries" make up the one “Transaction".
I’d be surprised if the overall process is different in the US, but the
nomenclature might well diverge.
Regards,
Michael
>
> Regards,
> Adrien
>
>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:46 AM, D via gnucash-user
>> wrote:
>>
>> It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple and
>> compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a special case
>> compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the difference between,
>> say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split" transaction, which we're
>> trying to move away from as justifiably confusing.
>>
>> Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems like
>> enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this (i.e., the
>> structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided {n>2} compound
>> transaction), could use the term "split," as it is defined by Gnucash. This
>> would disambiguate the use of the term "split," such that it would only be
>> used for this specific case.
>>
>> Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
>>
>> Perhaps we need a translation from American English to British English...
>>
>> David
>>
>
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
> On 21 Mar 2019, at 14:46, D via gnucash-user wrote:
>
> It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple and
> compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a special case
> compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the difference between,
> say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split" transaction, which we're
> trying to move away from as justifiably confusing.
What I meant was that the simple transaction is treated as a special case in
that it appears on one line in the relevant GnuCash register - and in the
context of some CSV imports might come in as a single line.
>
> Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems like
> enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this (i.e., the
> structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided {n>2} compound
> transaction), could use the term "split," as it is defined by Gnucash. This
> would disambiguate the use of the term "split," such that it would only be
> used for this specific case.
>
> Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
>
> Perhaps we need a translation from American English to British English…
I should have thought “Ledger Entry” would work on either side of the Atlantic,
if not it’s clearly unsuitable!
Michael
>
> David
>
> On March 21, 2019, at 7:47 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
> "David T. via gnucash-user" writes:
>
>> I like the terminology “simple” versus “compound”, but I do not
>> understand what is meant by a “ two-line simple transaction as a
>> special case of a compound transaction.”
>
> This is what happens you expand a simple transaction (which has only 2
> splits) by clicking on the "Show Splits" button, or change the View to
> Split-ledger or Transaction Journal mode. It will display as a compound
> transaction but have only two lines (plus the blank spilt line).
>
>> David
>
>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
> -derek
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
I’m not sure ‘ledger entry’ is a prime choice either. If we were to consider
the pen and paper world, this is done as a ‘journal entry’ but that entry
always has two components (debit and credit) with at minimum two accounts
involved. I’m going to dig up my accounting textbook and see how they reference
the entries but I’m going to hazard an early guess that there is no mention of
the individual parts of the transaction other than debit/credit.
Regards,
Adrien
> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:46 AM, D via gnucash-user
> wrote:
>
> It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple and
> compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a special case
> compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the difference between,
> say, a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split" transaction, which we're
> trying to move away from as justifiably confusing.
>
> Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems like
> enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this (i.e., the
> structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided {n>2} compound
> transaction), could use the term "split," as it is defined by Gnucash. This
> would disambiguate the use of the term "split," such that it would only be
> used for this specific case.
>
> Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
>
> Perhaps we need a translation from American English to British English...
>
> David
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
It seems circular to say that there is a distinction between a simple and
compound transaction, and then say a simple transaction is a special case
compound transaction. Then we're back at defining the difference between, say,
a "split" transaction versus a "multi-split" transaction, which we're trying to
move away from as justifiably confusing.
Calling one a "simple" transaction, and the others "compound" seems like
enough. Perhaps the explanation of the technical aspects of this (i.e., the
structure of a two sided simple, as opposed to an n-sided {n>2} compound
transaction), could use the term "split," as it is defined by Gnucash. This
would disambiguate the use of the term "split," such that it would only be used
for this specific case.
Regardless, I am still against the "Ledger entry" locution.
Perhaps we need a translation from American English to British English...
David
On March 21, 2019, at 7:47 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
"David T. via gnucash-user" writes:
> I like the terminology “simple” versus “compound”, but I do not
> understand what is meant by a “ two-line simple transaction as a
> special case of a compound transaction.”
This is what happens you expand a simple transaction (which has only 2
splits) by clicking on the "Show Splits" button, or change the View to
Split-ledger or Transaction Journal mode. It will display as a compound
transaction but have only two lines (plus the blank spilt line).
> David
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
-derek
--
Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com
Computer and Internet Security Consultant
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
"David T. via gnucash-user" writes: > I like the terminology “simple” versus “compound”, but I do not > understand what is meant by a “ two-line simple transaction as a > special case of a compound transaction.” This is what happens you expand a simple transaction (which has only 2 splits) by clicking on the "Show Splits" button, or change the View to Split-ledger or Transaction Journal mode. It will display as a compound transaction but have only two lines (plus the blank spilt line). > David > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. -derek -- Derek Atkins 617-623-3745 de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com Computer and Internet Security Consultant ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
I like the terminology “simple” versus “compound”, but I do not understand what is meant by a “ two-line simple transaction as a special case of a compound transaction.” David > On Mar 21, 2019, at 4:40 PM, Geert Janssens > wrote: > > Op woensdag 20 maart 2019 12:35:40 CET schreef Michael Hendry: >>> On 20 Mar 2019, at 10:52, Geert Janssens >>> wrote:> >>> Op woensdag 20 maart 2019 10:51:55 CET schreef Michael Hendry: Would anyone think it odd that a different process would be required when importing a compound transaction than when importing a simple one? >>> >>> I think that depends on the input source format: csv is generic and >>> doesn't >>> strictly define how to encode accounting data. >>> >>> GnuCash tries cater for as many formats as possible. So it offers a way to >>> import csv files with only one transaction per line or a csv file where >>> each line consists of one ledger entry/split and hence transaction can >>> span multiple lines. >> >> So the choice is between importing “Simple Transactions” and “Compound >> Transactions”, with a two-line simple transaction as a special case of a >> compound transaction. > > Right. So would "simple transaction" vs "compound transaction" be a good > candidate for > better terminology ? > > Regards, > > Geert > ___ > gnucash-user mailing list > gnucash-user@gnucash.org > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. > - > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Re: [GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
Op woensdag 20 maart 2019 12:35:40 CET schreef Michael Hendry: > > On 20 Mar 2019, at 10:52, Geert Janssens > > wrote:> > > Op woensdag 20 maart 2019 10:51:55 CET schreef Michael Hendry: > >> Would anyone think it odd that a different process would be required when > >> importing a compound transaction than when importing a simple one? > > > > I think that depends on the input source format: csv is generic and > > doesn't > > strictly define how to encode accounting data. > > > > GnuCash tries cater for as many formats as possible. So it offers a way to > > import csv files with only one transaction per line or a csv file where > > each line consists of one ledger entry/split and hence transaction can > > span multiple lines. > > So the choice is between importing “Simple Transactions” and “Compound > Transactions”, with a two-line simple transaction as a special case of a > compound transaction. Right. So would "simple transaction" vs "compound transaction" be a good candidate for better terminology ? Regards, Geert ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
[GNC] The Meaning of Split (previously Example of multi-split feature of CSV importer?)
> On 20 Mar 2019, at 10:52, Geert Janssens wrote: > > Op woensdag 20 maart 2019 10:51:55 CET schreef Michael Hendry: >> Which supports my contention that the use of the term “split” for a Ledger >> Entry causes confusion. >> > Fair enough. As I said if there's a concise yet more clear term to use I'm > happy to switch to it. > > Personally I'm not convinced yet "Ledger Entry" would be that replacement. > Surely it would appeal to people with an accounting background, but it > doesn't feel like very intuitive for the casual user just wishing to keep > track of its personal finances in GnuCash. I agree, “Ledger Entry” is a bit clunky, but the casual user has to have (at least) a nodding acquaintance with double-entry bookkeeping to be able to use Gnucash. If you look in any book-keeping primer, you’ll find a definition of a Ledger Entry, but you won’t find a “split” defined there. > As English is not my native > language that may be a translation issue though. However perhaps more > informal > terminology exists to describe subparts of a transaction ? I haven’t come across such a term, but maybe I don’t get out enough? > > In addition it seems to me this thread has now evolved to discussing two > distinct terminology issues: > * the use of the word "split" in itself > * the use of the term "multi" in "multi-split" to mean "more than two" rather > than "two or more”. Indeed - I’ve altered the subject line. > >> Would anyone think it odd that a different process would be required when >> importing a compound transaction than when importing a simple one? >> > I think that depends on the input source format: csv is generic and doesn't > strictly define how to encode accounting data. > > GnuCash tries cater for as many formats as possible. So it offers a way to > import csv files with only one transaction per line or a csv file where each > line consists of one ledger entry/split and hence transaction can span > multiple lines. So the choice is between importing “Simple Transactions” and “Compound Transactions”, with a two-line simple transaction as a special case of a compound transaction. > > As GnuCash doesn't define the input sources (those come from banks, a > spreadsheet, another accounting application,...) I don't see how that could > be > covered with only one import interface. Agreed - the user would need to specify the appropriate format at import time if the importing software can’t determine it by inspection. > > Regards, > > Geert Regards, Michael ___ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. - Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
