Re: [Gnue] RE: [xbrl-public] Requesting an official report on GL schema

[Derek A. Neighbors]

> Todd, Hi.  First, I said you were way off in left-fied with your remarks that 
> XBRL is >trying to keep its membership to a minimum so we can
> maximize consulting fees.  That's wrong, and there's no excuse for you to 
> make such >accusations.

I dont know the nature of this thread, but my question would be why
membership fees to participate in XBRL? (If there are, I thought I saw
there were)  No sane developer is going to pay a few to sit on groups
discussions. (At least no Free Software Developer)  As Free software
continues to grow this is a market I doubt you will want to exclude.
      
> Re scope, my own view is that every one of the e-commerce standards 
> eventually will link >to XBRL for e-reporting.  XBRL, in effect, will become
> the magnet specification for internal financial issues, as well as external.  
> This will be >done by collaboration and coordination with
> industry-specific transaction languages and with some of the over-arching 
> frameworks as >well.

I would be interested in your reporting standards and methodology.  GNU
Enterprise is working on some reporting structures/methodologies with
GNOME-DB and the Free Software Foundation.  Perceivably this could make
its way into Debian and GNOME.  Since GNOME will ship with Solaris and
the office suite is merging with StarOffice, I wouldnt count out free
software.
  
> Btw, please excuse the multiple postings but, as a subscriber to Gnue, I 
> think it would be >useful to hear others' feeling about what XBRL ought
> to be doing in this space.  Thanks for your attention.

In all spaces, get developers involved.  A specification made by suits
for suits without developer buy in is nothing but a dead specification.

Derek Neighbors
GNU Enterprise
http://www.gnue.org
address@hidden