HOME / COMMUNITY Switch to knowledge base

Tagging bank transactions description field too short, no project tags, and no "attach invoice"

#1

Hi,

When tagging the bank details, and creating the invoice from this page (which is really really handy!), I’ve noticed

  • Description tag is short - some descriptions we use are longer than what the field allows - so we have to go back to the invoice and edit it again.
  • There is not project tagging - it would be great if we could enter them in there rather than having to go back to the invoice page (but it should also remain in the invoice page where it is very useful)
  • There is not “attach invoice” option - to attach a PDF, jpg etc… - this would be really handy

With the above 3 points implemented it would be possible to complete the creation of the invoice in one go
Can you please consider?

Many thanks
Guillaume

1 Like

#2

Thank you for the suggestions here.

One thing we feel very strongly about is keeping the bank tagging flow lightweight and fast. If we go down the route of adding each and every feature available on the standard invoice entry form to the bank tagging tool, this really defeats it’s purpose.

It’s very unlikely we will provide a file upload control on bank tagging for the aforementioned reasons (instead take a look at tagging from the Receipt Hub). Project tags is a maybe, although I would ask you to add your vote to the existing feature thread.

The description field is another “maybe”, currently it’s locked to the short description field on the invoice. I don’t believe this has come up before but again we will monitor any interest in this feature from other users.

0 Likes

#3

Hi, thanks for the quick answer.
If any, the description field should be a sensible length - right now it is too short. I would expect it is quite straightforward to correct.

I hear your idea about lightweight form, but if doing the lightweight form means you have to go through the invoice page anyway doesn’t this defeat the purpose?

1 Like

#4

When we make design choices we need to think about different use-cases. We have a wide range of different businesses using QF in a variety of ways, some of which we never anticipated.

By adding more controls to this flow it will disrupt those users who are simply concerned about getting the bookkeeping done with minimal time invested, many for example won’t need to project tag or upload backing documents.

Even if we add these controls on an optional basis, it will demand attention for the user, particularly those that are learning how to use the software. These small changes have large cumulative outcomes. Not only this but duplicating functionality everywhere makes the code-base heavier and more difficult to manage.

If there was a real strong theme appearing on our forums for a given feature we would certainly try to accommodate. As a couple of these points haven’t come up before we will usually wait for wider consensus to appear before going ahead with anything. In this regard I would recommend posting every feature to a separate topic, that way it will be more prominent in the search and will gain wider exposure and support from others looking for something similar.

0 Likes

#5

Thanks. No problem, shall I re-do this for the 2 points here, besides the one you highlighted already?

0 Likes

#6

I would suggest posting a feature request for “file uploads” and adding your vote to the existing “project tagging” thread.

Regarding the description I have asked this to be reviewed, as you say it should be a relatively simple enhancement.

0 Likes

#7

Silly question, but do you vote by “like” heart?

0 Likes

#8

Yes, or simply adding a comment. It’s not an exact science but we can filter topics by likes and activity.

0 Likes

#9

@guillaume.khw

This particular request has been addressed now, please see below:

Project Tagging Updates (January 2018)

0 Likes