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

[David Houlden]

On Wednesday 29 September 2010 allan wrote:
> 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'?
>
> Allan
That would still be misleading IMHO. The date shown in the message is the 
date of the oldest transaction with a blank status. There may be older 
cleared transactions (status of C) which also need to be reconciled. 
Or maybe the date should be the oldest transaction with status C or blank in 
which case Allan's suggestion is a good one.