[Kmymoney-devel] Re: [Bug 241855] Reconciliation wizard fails to calculate correct difference

allan aganderson at ukonline.co.uk
Wed Sep 29 17:23:40 CEST 2010

On 29/09/10 16:07, Alvaro Soliverez wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Jack <ostroffjh at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> On 2010.09.29 10:09, Alvaro Soliverez wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:05 AM, David Houlden <djhoulden at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday 29 September 2010 Jack wrote:
>>>>> It does make sense, but I'm not sure "None" would help anyone who
>>> does
>>>>> not already know how reconciliation works.  In the transaction
>>> form,
>>>>> the field label is "Status" so would a more explicit "Not set"
>>> work?
>>>>> I'm trying to think about the new user who does not yet understand
>>> how
>>>>> reconciliation works.  The values of the field are "reconciled" or
>>>>> "cleared" or something else, but the third one isn't really another
>>>>> value, it just hasn't been set to one of the first two.
>>>> "Not set" sounds good. In the status filter selection list it
>>> appears
>>>> as "Not marked".
>>>> So what would Alvaro's new message in the reconciliation wizard be?
>>> I'm not
>>>> sure exactly what information or condition it is trying to convey
>>> to the
>>>> user.
>>> Then it would be "Oldest not set transaction" It intends to offer
>>> information on what transactions were used to get to the starting
>>> balance.
>> Is there enough room to say "Oldest transaction not set to reconciled
>> or cleared" or "Oldest transaction not marked as reconciled or cleared"
>> ?  The shorter version is OK, but I think the longer one would help new
>> users more.
> I would stay away from long texts. We've been already criticized on
> that wizard due to long texts that nobody actually reads.

How about 'oldest transaction needing to be reconciled'?


More information about the KMyMoney-devel mailing list