multiple display of the same transaction

[Stuart McGraw]

On 04/03/2012 06:15 PM, David Carlson wrote:
>[...]
> As Derek pointed out, by design, the basic view is showing split lines
> individually rather than complete transactions.

But as I responded to Derek, I think it makes more sense 
(for the reasons I gave) to think of the "entries" shown 
in a register tab, as transactions rather than splits.

Further, I'd wager that is how most Gnucash users think 
of them.

And quoting from the Concepts Guide, the first sentence 
of the _Features of the Account Register_ section says, 

 "The account register is the GnuCash window which allows
  you to view or edit preexisting *transactions*, or add
  new *transactions* for a particular account." [my emphasis]

> For me, I have no problem accepting multiple split lines being shown in
> some cases because, as you point out, each split line in your example
> should have a different description.  

In my example, each split line *does* have a different
description (aka Memo).  However, in Basic Ledger view,
one does not see any of the Memo fields.  What one sees
is the *transaction* Description (and optionally the
Notes line), shown twice:

Date        Num  Description      Transfer       Deposit Withdraw Bal
-----------+---+----------------+-------------------+---+--------+----
2012-04-04 |   | Deposit checks | Split Transaction |   | 150.00 | ... 
-----------+---+----------------+-------------------+---+--------+----
2012-04-04 |   | Deposit checks | Split Transaction |   | 200.00 | ... 
-----------+---+----------------+-------------------+---+--------+----

You can of course switch to Auto-Split or Transaction 
Journal views to see the Memo fields.  But then, since 
you are now viewing all the information for the transaction, 
why do you need the transaction shown twice in the register? 
You'll see exactly the same info no matter which entry you
look at.

So if you are using either of those views, you have two 
entries that show complete but identical info.  And if 
you are using Basic Ledger view neither entry shows enough 
information to describe, or even reliably identify, the
split it is displaying.

And of course if you have twenty checks rather than two...

To me it would be much more intuitive and useful to simply
display one entry in the above case:

Date        Num  Description      Transfer          Deposit Withdraw Bal
-----------+----+----------------+-------------------+-----+--------+-----
2012-04-04 |    | Deposit checks | Split Transaction |     | 350.00 | ... 
-----------+----+----------------+-------------------+-----+--------+-----

> I want a way to see those split
> related descriptions, and the present display method does show them.

Only if you are using Auto-split or Transaction Ledger 
view in which case you don't need the same transaction 
shown multiple times.

> The two most common examples of transactions that can have many split
> lines would be a paycheck transaction with the deductions split to
> separate accounts and an aggregated deposit transaction split to match a
> paper deposit slip.  In both those cases, individual line descriptions
> matter in the 'child' accounts, where they may appear more than once in
> the same transaction.

To me, a typical paycheck transaction is something like

  Income:Salary               750.00
  Expenses:Withhold:FedTax              100.00
  Expenses:Withhold:FICA                 40.00
  Expenses:Withhold:StateTax             30.00
  Assets:Bank:Checking                  580.00       

So I don't understand what accounts would appear more 
than once in such a transaction.  Could you give an
example?

> If it is actually possible to delete an entire transaction by
> highlighting one line in the basic view as you allege, I would consider
> that a reportable bug. 

To clarify, "one line" in this context means an entry
(what I view as a transaction) in the a register tab, not
a split line shown as part of a transaction viewed in
Auto-split or transaction journal view.

Since I argue that it is more useful (and very common)
to view registers as showing transactions, I would expect
"Delete" to delete the transaction it is executed in.

I think if there's a bug[*1], it is the showing of a 
transaction multiple times when it contains multiple 
splits for the same account.

> Before reporting it, though, be sure that you
> have not accidentally turned off the delete warning confirmation.  Go to
> Actions:Reset Warnings to check whether that is the case.

Not sure why the delete confirmation choice would affect 
anything.

----
[*1] I wouldn't actually call it a bug, more an artifact
of the implementation.