Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: "topmind" <topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Dec 2006 11:09:38 -0800
Thomas Gagne wrote:
topmind wrote:
Is it required to be implemented the same way as done on paper? Or is
one merely required to present it in double-entry form (which is just a
presentation issue)? It seems foolish to have laws that force
denormalized data.
How does the law require denormalized data?
That is what I was asking. I was not sure if the criticism of my
suggestion was from a legal standpoint or an implementation standpoint.
Thus, I commented on both possibilities rather than play 20 questions.
--
Visit <http://blogs.instreamfinancial.com/anything.php>
to read my rants on technology and the finance industry.
-T-
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: Thomas Gagne
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- References:
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- From: Thomas Gagne
- Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- Prev by Date: Re: Databases as objects
- Next by Date: Re: looking for a predicate hierarchy
- Previous by thread: Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- Next by thread: Re: double-entry bookkeeping unneeded?
- Index(es):