Budgeting prototype

[marthter]

Derek Neighbors wrote:

>Darin Willits said:
>  
>
>>On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 11:03, Stewart V. Wright wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Another point or two of clarification:  (For this I am using [B] to
>>>specify a budget category, as apposed to a regular account)
>>> * Would I be able to link Expenses:Dining and Expenses:Groceries to
>>>   the same [B]Expenses:Food category?
>>>   I guess so, from figure 5 on your page.
>>> * Will I be able to see all the transactions for a particular budget
>>>   category?
>>>      
>>>
>>Maybe another window could handle this.  Some sort of customised account
>>register with transactions for a period for all the accounts in that
>>catagory.  A right click menu option could bring up this register for
>>the selected category.  Come to think of it this might go hand in hand
>>with the suggestion for a planned/actual view of the budgeting
>>information.  If you see that you were over budget in a certain category
>>for a period you could bring up this window to see the transactions
>>which contributed to that situation.
>>    
>>
>
>Maybe I'm psycho but why wouldn't you just make your accounts:
>
>Expenses:Food
>Expenses:Food:Dining
>Expenses:Food:Groceries
>
>Then you choose to budget at the "Food" level and expend at the "sub"
>level.  This is how most budgets work.  You have a chart of accounts with
>each element having different "levels".  Often you budget at a higher
>level than you expend.  I see where you are trying to be flexible, but I
>think you are making it more complicated than it needs to be. In order to
>have some resemblance to committment control you really need your budget
>accounts to mirror your expense accounts even if the budget is placed at a
>different level in the hierarchy tree than the expense.
>
>-Derek Neighbors
>
>  
>
I see your point about keeping it simple, but I like the extra 
flexibility if it doesn't make the implementation too crazy.

Maybe I'm psycho but I can think of lots of cases where the budget could 
have to cut across the accounts heirarchy.  (This sort of goes back to 
the 1-dimensional vs. 2-dimensional ideas in account naming.)

Maybe my accounts tree goes
Expenses:Medical:him
Expenses:Medical:her
Expenses:Transport:him
Expenses:Transport:her

But I want to try a budget based on the him/her distinction.

Maybe *I'm* psycho and I have 100 Expense accounts but only to one level 
of depth (Expenses:whatever).  And I want to budget 70% of my money on 
"accounts that end in vowels" and 30% on "accounts that end in 
consonants".  I mean it is an obtuse example, but why should the design 
force a decision on the user that makes that impossible?

Maybe I talk to myself and play my own devil's advocate.  I'm 
Spartacus.  No I'm Spartacus.

All four of us like Darin's direction on this point.

~Martin