http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/en-USSquarespace Site Server v5.0.0 (http://www.squarespace.com/)DanThu, 14 Aug 2008 02:32:54 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/7/31/value-of-the-us-gaap-taxonomy.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1768930
There are two different financial reports on two different companies, one using US GAAP and the other using IFRS - does XBRL allow a comparison of this data? Do both financial reports need to use the same taxonomy (either GAAP or IFRs)?]]>Kingsley IdehenMon, 21 Jul 2008 20:25:13 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/7/20/different-ways-to-useview-the-us-gaap-taxonomy.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1641415
Links:

1. http://ode.openlinksw.com
2. http://ode.openlinksw.com/example.html
3. http://ode.openlinksw.com/example.html#ExampleXBRLfromSEC - XBRL Instance Doc as Linked Data Source
4. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8062 - Download Location]]>Jim RichardsTue, 03 Jun 2008 06:46:07 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/5/23/xbrl-in-plain-english.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1536998Thanks for the link even though it was also available from an XII email.

I think it is a good way to get the message across. My only concern with the clip/explanation is the part abut comparing companies from China and Japan. The comment gives the impression that this will be really simple but there are several assumptions behind that comment:
1. They are both based on the same taxonomy (unlikely as each country has it own taxonomy)
2. They are both based on the same set of accounting standards (also unlikely as they have not fully adopted IFRS)
3. Exchange rates cause no concern in comparing values in Yen and Remimbi.]]>JIim RichardsWed, 14 May 2008 13:58:38 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/5/10/how-xbrl-works.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1499777Good stuff as usual. Like John, it took me a while to recognise the voice. At first I thought you had someone do the voiceover.

Not sure if it is your recording or my sound settings but initially it did not sound like your voice. It was a bit too bassy and a little hard to hear. You may need to adjust some settings to get a cleaner sound.

I wish I had thought of a similar approach when I was trying to teach the basics to my students a few years ago.

Cheers.

Jim.]]>John TurnerTue, 13 May 2008 15:18:23 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/5/10/how-xbrl-works.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1498009
Now, take this to the *next* step, and capture the rendering *and* the XBRL, via the new Inline XBRL specification, which is currently a public working draft.

Inline XBRL is a way of mixing XBRL and XHTML, so that preparers can get their messages across, rendered the way they want to see it, and *structured* with XBRL. The combination is pretty powerful and I expect that many corporate filings and web sites will use this new, optional module for getting their messages across to investors, analysts and other users of their performance data.

As you know, you can nest tags with Inline, which means that you can "block tag" the paragraph and "data tag" the facts inside the paragraph, and get *all* that information into your instance document.

Anyway -- let me know if you want me to extend your example here as Inline and I'll try to get around to it in the next couple of weeks. You have a much better speaking manner, so I'd love to see you have a crack at it!

See you soon...

Cheers

John Turner]]>Darrell HeapsSun, 11 May 2008 21:18:54 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/5/10/how-xbrl-works.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1493476Steven HornikSun, 11 May 2008 13:22:29 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/5/10/how-xbrl-works.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1493011Miles JenningsSat, 10 May 2008 18:02:20 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/5/10/how-xbrl-works.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1492150
The transmission is clean and clear from a technical standpoing. And, above all, your comments frame the broad topic well.

I hope you will soon move on to Hollywood and get the major studios to spread the word on XBRL.

I have added your video to our archives at:
www.XBRLnetwork.com and www.XBRLvideos.com

Miles]]>Miles JenningsWed, 02 Apr 2008 18:55:37 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2008/3/31/exposure-draft-of-2008-ifrs-taxonomy-released.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1395613
The IASC's XBRL team met their deadline of March 31st to release the near-final draft of the IFRS Taxonomy 2008---a complete translation of IFRS into XBRL which underwent extensive external review by a committee of 20 experts. Similar to the SEC process, there is a period for interested parties to send in their comments by May 30th---with the final version expected at the end of June.

When and if the IFRS and GAAP can come together and agree on final reporting standards, there should be rapid compliance and a dramatic increase in comparability and transparency of financial statements. Then, I suspect the analyst community will soup up the statements into interactive presentations which will give Disney a run for their money. As an example, check out the flashing box at http://xbrl.rienks@biz/. With wide compliance across companies and countries, I suspect that real-time XBRLized data will make for eye-poppin' content for the financial markets.]]>Jim RichardsTue, 29 Jan 2008 04:14:29 +0000http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2007/12/13/us-gaap-taxonomy-and-dimensions.html#comments24118:165869:comment/1252234My understanding of dimensions is that it allows users to see different views of the data. Whilst it is possible to do this with a large number of elements, it is easier to create them using XBRL dimensions as a single dimension can be used with a number of primary items rather than having to create a large number of elements (primary items).

I guess the opposing viewpoint is that whilst there are less elements there are more contexts in the related instance documents and the calcuation linkbase cannot calculate across contexts to verify totals. I know that this problem will be fixed with the Formula Specfication, but then formulas will initially be complex and reduce in complexity as software applications create better interfaces to create them.

Hopefully the same will occur for dimensions. At the moment the process to create them is not that easy. However, I think that software that creates instance documents using dimensions is more important than software applications used to build taxonomies. Those building taxonomies need to have the XBRL knowledge to create the dimensions meta data correctly. Those creating instance documents based on those dimensions will probably not have the same level of XBRL knowledge as the taxonomy authors.

My concern with the UGT is when less informed users are required to create extensions where dimensions are involved and they do not have sufficient understanding of the underlying XBRL knowledge. I have read most of the Preparers' Guide and I am not convinced there is really enough information in that for preparers who might need to create an extension taxonomy. I might need to read it again several times in detail to reach a final conclusion on this topic. There are many mentions of (needing) to create extensions but the detail on how to go about it seems to be lacking detail.]]>