All transactions from QIF import listed as unspecified ... me too

[Donald Allen]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Derek Atkins <warlord at mit.edu> wrote:
> Quoting susie <goddens at gmail.com>:
>
>> I think I have answered my problem myself after searching through a few
>> more archives .. the payee needs to be exactly the same each time it is
>> imported, for GnuCash to recognise it .. pity my bank puts extra info
>> in the payee field.  Would it be sensible to make the matching system a
>> bit more intelligent?
>
> The new matcher, used by OFX, HBCI, CSV, etc, is much more intelligent,
> and even includes a Bayesian-style matching system.   But the QIF
> importer doesn't use that infrastructure, yet.

Derek --

I'll add my vote to the importance of the .qif importer using the
smart matcher. I import credit card statements every month and obtain
those statements as .qif files. It's a pain that essentially every
transaction gets mapped to 'Unspecified'.

But I notice that you mention CSV, above, as using the smart matcher.
Is there a way to import something like a credit card statement in
.csv format, because they are available in that format from many of
the credit-card companies. I note that the File->Import menu gives you
a choice between importing .qifs or replaying .log files, so I'm
guessing the answer to my question is 'no', but thought I'd give it
try anyway.

/Don

>
>> thanks
>> susie
>
>> 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, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
>       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
>       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
>       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>