Bug 395047

Summary:	Exported csv file from categories does not follow RFC 4180 standard
Product:	[Applications] kmymoney	Reporter:	Ralf Habacker <ralf.habacker>
Component:	exporter	Assignee:	KMyMoney Devel Mailing List <kmymoney-devel>
Status:	REPORTED ---
Severity:	normal
Priority:	NOR
Version:	4.7.0
Target Milestone:	---
Platform:	unspecified
OS:	All
Latest Commit:		Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:
Attachments:	test file

Description Ralf Habacker 2018-06-05 08:51:31 UTC

Created attachment 113087 [details]
test file

How to reproduce:
1. Open appended kmymoney file
2. Choose file->export->csv
3. Choose output file
4. Choose type "categories"
5. Choose account "girokonto"
6. select ',' as delimiter
7. start export

What happens ?
The exporter generates a csv file with the following content:
interest,I
income,I
income,subincome,I
fees,E
expense,E
expense,subexpense,E

What is expected ?
RFC 4180 standard for csv files (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma-separated_values#RFC_4180_standard) states:
1. Each record "should" contain the same number of comma-separated fields
2. An optional header record
3. Any field may be quoted (with double quotes).
4. Fields containing a line-break, double-quote or commas should be quoted. (If they are not, the file will likely be impossible to process correctly).

Issue 3. and 4. are covered by bug 395025, issue 2 is a "nice to have feature"

Comment 1 Jack 2021-08-05 18:28:03 UTC

I think adding a header record, and assuring all rows have the same number of fields (issues 1 and 2) is a wishlist, not a bug.  "Should" is not "must" in an RFC, as far as I know.  Issues 3 and 4 were fixed per the referenced bug.  Aside from that, I do agree these should be fixed.

Comment 2 Thomas Baumgart 2021-08-06 06:49:35 UTC

To add to Jack's comment, here the definition from rfc 2119:

3. SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
   may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
   particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
   carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

From https://www.ietf.org/blog/how-read-rfc/:

In practice, authors often use SHOULD and SHOULD NOT to mean “We’d like you to do this, but we know we can’t always require it.”