Double-entry explanation

[Jon Lapham]

Tim Wunder wrote:
> So...
> Are we back to 
> Simple Transaction
> Complex (Split) Transaction
> and just leaving off any reference to the number of accounts involved?

Ahhhhhh...... kerplung.  (or, whatever the sound is of someone jumping 
from a tall bridge into the river below).

:)

"3 or more accounts" refers to the number of accounts involved in the 
transaction, I do not see how this requires that they are different 
accounts.  I think we are still fine.

There are always better ways to describe things, but often that requires 
longer explanations.  At some point we have to put a title on the 
section and move on, we can be *very* clear what we mean in the body 
text.  Another complication, for example, is that you can enter a "split 
transaction" with only 2 accounts, so is it wrong to not mention this in 
the title of the simple transaction?

So, let's vote on the following two proposals for the section titles:

Simple Transaction (2 accounts)
Split Transaction (3 or more accounts)

or

Simple Transaction Which May or May Not Involve the Split Transaction 
Mechanism but Must Only Involve 2 Accounts

Transaction Involving More that Two Accounts In Which May or May Not be 
Different Accounts but Will Always Involve the Split Transaction Mechanism

-- 
-**-*-*---*-*---*-*---*-----*-*-----*---*-*---*-----*-----*-*-----*---
  Jon Lapham  <lapham at extracta.com.br>          Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
  Work: Extracta Moléculas Naturais SA     http://www.extracta.com.br/
  Web: http://www.jandr.org/
***-*--*----*-------*------------*--------------------*---------------