Hello Pete,
Sorry for the delay in response. It's been a busy week!
I really appreciate your thoughts and concerns in your post. Let me see if I can help clear things up.
It sounds like your main concern has to do with report integrity. I'm totally on board with that! However, isn't it quite normal in accounting reports to list only one side of a journal entry in some reports? For example, the "GL Account Transactions" report allows me to select a given account and view only certain transactions. The report doesn't balance, but it's not supposed to.
So, I'm not suggesting that all reports would necessarily utilize tags, but only ones for which it makes sense. For example, when you generate your "List of Journal Entries" report, it will still show all accounts whether or not they're tagged, since that's what makes sense.
I'm merely suggesting that we make more report possibilities available without having to generate custom reports (which are more error prone as accounts or dimensions were added/modified). For example, we would use tagging for the "GL Account Transactions" report. The built-in reporting doesn't allow you to select arbitrary accounts or dimensions. If you want more than one account or dimension, it has to be in sequential order. But if we added tagging ability to this report, things are much more flexible!
A use case of tagging on accounts and dimensions for the "GL Account Transactions" report would be viewing all HR-associated expenses for all cost centers located within the Northeast United States. To do this, we'd create tags for "HR-associated expenses" (accounts) and "Cost centers in Northeast US" (dimensions). If we get a new cost center in Boston OR add a new HR-related account to our chart of accounts, we just tag it appropriately and our report will pick it up next time. No need to write new reports or update old ones!
Does that make sense?
~Tom