<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[FrontAccounting forum — Draft and confirmed transaction]]></title>
		<link>https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=709</link>
		<atom:link href="https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=709&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Draft and confirmed transaction.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:25:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>PunBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Draft and confirmed transaction]]></title>
			<link>https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=3214#p3214</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Another point of view over the same problem: the voiding process could allow the creation of a editable copy of the transaction that is being voiding, but including a reference (non-editable) to the voided transaction. In this way, you preserve the common practice and facilitate the accountant&#039;s work.</p><p>Saludos</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (jsantand)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:25:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=3214#p3214</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Draft and confirmed transaction]]></title>
			<link>https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=2903#p2903</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I think it was very usefully each transactions have a status: Draft or Confirmed to possibilit imput transactions before totally aproved. Until be aproved can be easly errase not void.<br />Something like bank reconciliation without return in all transactions</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (jose manuel)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=2903#p2903</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
