“is one of” operator should be included in the advance rule structure.

Presently we are not able to select a list of main accounts in the advance rule criteria.

The workaround of creating a new advance rule for each and every main account is very lengthy and takes a lot of time.
Category: General Ledger
Under Review
Ideas Administrator

Great idea!  This will be added to the backlog of work for this area. 





I strongly support this idea.
The main purpose of Advanced rules is to setup some exceptional rules related to an account structure.
In this way, Advanced rule applies to a "list" of main accounts very often. Not all these accounts are included in a range.
Currently we have to setup as many advanced rule criterias than main accounts applying to, that can be a lot of setup. It is also very hard to maintain for the customer.

I would be grateful if you can have this idea under review.

Category: General Ledger


Firstly there are few things that appears to not make any logical sense.

-The Value field within the advanced rule allows to enter more than one value when the operator "Is" being used using a separator like ";"

-Having allowed to enter values with the separator it is actually misleading and wrong as it allows the Account structure to be activated without giving any error message or at least warning message. This is not known to the user until it is being identified during transaction processing.
- When the advanced rule works on "Range of accounts" using the operator like "between and includes" it is important to allow for the rule criteria to allow the rule to work on any random selection of accounts using a relevant operator with a separator. This is essential for Businesses dealing with large chart of accounts and multiple dimension. It does not make it easy to create mutiple advanced rule to deal with multiple accounts where same criteria applies.

Category: General Ledger