Possible problem with splits

[Andrew Sackville-West]

On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 08:31:49AM -0500, Mike or Penny Novack wrote:
> I was probably not being clear enough?

Let's make it rtuly clear by using the right terminology. Below is a
crude drawing of a "double line" txn view (View->Double Line) of a
split transaction. In this mode you can see *all* the fields:


Date | Num | Description |
     |     | Notes                         |
     |     | Action | Memo                 |  Account | DR | CR |
     |     | Act2   | Memo2                | Account2 | DR | CR | 
....

So, 

Description is the field that "ties" the whole transaction
together. For a check it would be the Payee. For a deposit, I guess
typically Deposit or whatever descriptve moniker you choose.

Notes is a scratch field that applies to the transaction as a whole
and is intended for comments about the transaction that aren't
necessarily important in the way Description->Payee (for example)
would be.

Action we'll ignore

Memo is a scratch field attached to the particular *split* and
described the split to which it is attached. 

Account is the relevant account the split.

DR/CR... 

Okay, I think you are saying that you would like to see the
Memo of a particular txn shown as the Description field when you view
a txn from one of the other splits? IOW, if we looked at the above txn
from the Account2 register we would see Memo2 displayed in the
description field. 

Or, maybe you realise that would be a pretty major change in the
register and maybe the data model underneath (I'll get to that) and
you'd like to see Memo2 displayed when the txn is not shown with the
splits expanded? 

Either way, you want Memo2 to be clearly visible on the other side
without expanding the splits and having to read through them? 

Is that a correct assessment of what you're looking for?

About the data model: In my limited understanding, the data is
"account neutral". By that I mean a txn has no "main account". All
accounts in a txn are of equal weight, therefore all splits are of
equal weight. A txn is tied equally to *all* the accounts in *all* its
splits. A txn is simply a list, in no particular order, of splits
attached to a record containing the Description, Date and Number. So
that means that there is no such thing as "Other" splits or "Other"
accounts, per se. They're all "others" relative to the current
view. Change registers and the concept of "other" changes.

There exists in the register a blank space, between the description
and the CR/DR columns. I've always thought that in single line mode,
it should house the Notes field as otherwise the Notes field is just
not visible and that annoys me. However, it could, I suppose, hold the
Memo of the split from the current account. That might get what you
want.

I've not even begun to rea the register code and have no clue how that
would be done or if it's even desirable. 

A
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-user/attachments/20080125/9074c158/attachment.bin