Did not have time to rest all in GnuCash but I am very happy with the discussion and all the suggestions and clearifications.
One question might help me even further: my old program made structure by numbering all accounts and keeping record what group or subgroup the entries are part or if the entry is group itself. The only other thing that had to be entered is if the account was a BALANS account or was part of the 'GAIN & LOSS' (free translation of 'winst en verlies rekening') account group. How would I translate or compare this dichotomy to the way GnuCash is structured!? Are some TYPES considered 'balans' types and all others part of the 'gain & LOSS' group? Vriendelijk groetend, Frank ter Braak > Op 9 aug. 2019 om 02:04 heeft David Cousens <davidcous...@bigpond.com> het > volgende geschreven: > > Frank, > > I had realised that was likely the situation. Fortunately, with the > occasional exception or two, most standards would have been converging > towards the IFRS in the core requirements prior to adoption, if they weren't > completely compliant. > > David > > > > ----- > David Cousens > -- > Sent from: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GnuCash-User-f1415819.html > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-user mailing list > gnucash-user@gnucash.org > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. > ----- > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All. _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. ----- Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
