On 30/07/14 22:53, geo...@wildturkeyranch.net wrote:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=337251
--- Comment #24 from geo...@wildturkeyranch.net ---
(In reply to allan from comment #23)
On 29/07/14 16:38, geo...@wildturkeyranch.net wrote:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=337251
--- Comment #22 from geo...@wildturkeyranch.net ---
(In reply to allan from comment #21)
On 28/07/14 17:43, geo...@wildturkeyranch.net wrote:
Quicken (version 2011)
does not supply "L" records.
I want to be clear about this point. Are you saying that it doesn't
*ever* produce "L" records, or that is doesn't the way you use it? For
instance is there any difference between how it exports a transaction
that has a category, or how it exports a transaction that does a
transfer to/from another, named account, or how it handles a transaction
from an investment account having a brokerage account?
QIF is a very loose 'standard', but Quicken itself has documented the
use of "L" records, so it would be surprising if it has just dropped
them altogether. If KMM tries to cope with such a change, then the full
picture will be needed.
Allan
I am only talking about the unified investment account transactions where you
will find 'L' records for transfers but not for the investment transactions.
By the way, my filter supplies these and also separates investment accounts
into two accounts to match KMM. Only problem I see is the DIV transactions end
up with the 'L' record taken as both a transfer and a cat. Not sure what is
happening here.
What has been the 'standard', up to now, is that in 'L' records, if the
'L' is followed with a name in brackets [], then the name is an account,
whereas 'L' followed by a name with no brackets, then that is a category.
If your original Quicken file follows that, but gives a problem, then
I'd need to look at that with your file.
So far as the 'X' issue is concerned, I *could* make a change to cope
with that, but I'm fearful that earlier files from other users would
then give trouble.
Allan
Hi
Comments interspersed below.
The 'L' record in non-investment accounts seems fine. I don't see 'L' records
in investment accounts except in transfer entries, e.g.:
D4/28' 6
NDiv
YFDRXX FIDELITY CASH RESERVES
CR
U180.05
T180.05
MDIVIDEND RECEIVED
^
If I add (in my 'filter') something like:
L[]
The entry shows up in the KMM FIDELITY (Brokerage) account as I think it
should, however in the KMM FIDELITY account in the 'Edit' window it shows
FIDELITY (Brokerage) as the entry in both the Account and the Interest field.
Should I also add an 'L' record such as:
LDiv
?
If I create a QIF file with your data exactly as you show, it doesn't
import as an investment, but as a checking transaction.
If I precede it with "!Type:Invst", then it imports. The activity shows
as Dividend, as does the category, and the transfer account as FIDELITY
(Brokerage). There is a split showing the Dividend category and amount.
In FIDELITY (Brokerage), initially, the Details first line shows the
security name, suffixed (Dividend), the second line shows Investment
transaction, and the Memo shows DIVIDEND RECEIVED. If I now double
click it, and accept the warning, Split transaction now shows, with two
lines - investAccount:FDRXX FIDELITY CASH RESERVES, with amount zero,
and the second line shows Dividend and the amount, both with the memo.
So, that seems to show as I would expect, and without any 'L' record.
That is because if no account is specified, the brokerage account is
used automatically, being created if it doesn't exist.
It doesn't seem to be as you say, unless you do also have the
"!Type:Invst" line but didn't mention it.
I'm using the development version, and I know some changes have been
made in the last few months, which may not all be in 4.6.4.
Is it OK to have two 'L' records?
I would say that that would result in unspecified results!
Allan
_______________________________________________
KMyMoney-devel mailing list
KMyMoney-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmymoney-devel
