FW: Reconciliation problem - State of transaction as reconciled is not preserved.

[Derek Atkins]

Hi,

"Avner" <avner-moshkovitz at shaw.ca> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I agree that it doesn't make sense to have a statement dated January 1 with
> a transaction that happened on January 5.
> However, the "Reconciliation" page for a statement date of January 1 DOES
> show transactions from a later date (e.g. January 5) but without the tick
> marks (even if transactions from a later date were ticked earlier, using
> reconciliation with a later statement date).

Yes, the reconcile window does show all unreconciled transactions,
even those dated after the reconcile date.  The reason is that it's
possible that you mis-dated a transaction.  If you go into the
register and reset the date to a 'cleared' transaction to make it
fall before the reconcile date then the reconcile window will
update and the transaction will automatically become 'checked'.

> So it also doesn't make sense to show transactions that happen after the
> statement date. But if later transactions are shown (current behavior) then
> I expect that the attributes of these transactions will also be shown.

Sorry, you're wrong.  See above.  The current behavior is the
correct behavior.

> Regards, 
> Avner

-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