Comments on: SEC mandates XBRL for financial statements http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/2008/12/18/sec-mandates-xbrl-for-financial-statements/ | Investor Relations Web Best Practices, Trends and News Tue, 16 Mar 2010 05:26:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Richard Haas http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/2008/12/18/sec-mandates-xbrl-for-financial-statements/#comment-930 Richard Haas Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:51:27 +0000 http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/?p=731#comment-930 Consider that it is not merely formatting, but accuracy and accountability that matter, per Professor Boritz at the URL above. Consider that it is not merely formatting, but accuracy and accountability that matter, per Professor Boritz at the URL above.

]]> By: Gary Purnhagen http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/2008/12/18/sec-mandates-xbrl-for-financial-statements/#comment-929 Gary Purnhagen Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:48:31 +0000 http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/?p=731#comment-929 Dominic, I read with interest your latest article on the SEC’s adoption of XBRL, particularly the section on rendering XBRL. You stated, “the information is useless to investors unless they have a way to view it.” My opinion is that investors do have very effective ways in which to view this information, they are PDF and HTML. As you put it later in the article, “If you’re going to use XBRL, then it should add something more than can be achieved with HTML.” I agree with you completely. XBRL is not about rendering for reading purposes, it is a machine language for computers to interact with to do what computers do best – compute. Microsoft’s parsing of their XBRL database is interesting, but certainly, it could have been achieved with formats other than XBRL. As you mentioned, there are few options for rendering XBRL and maybe fewer to use this information the way it is meant to be used. Nonetheless, as you mention we have to start somewhere, and I do believe by beginning with the largest 500 companies, that information will be of interest to many parties and consumption tools will be developed. I also find it amusing that the software vendors are high-fiving over this mandate. The SEC has done for them what they could not - convince the business community, that XBRL would add value by the “cheaper, faster, better” proposition. Forget “cheaper, faster, better,” its required! Gary Purnhagen Dominic,

I read with interest your latest article on the SEC’s adoption of XBRL, particularly the section on rendering XBRL. You stated, “the information is useless to investors unless they have a way to view it.” My opinion is that investors do have very effective ways in which to view this information, they are PDF and HTML.

As you put it later in the article, “If you’re going to use XBRL, then it should add something more than can be achieved with HTML.” I agree with you completely. XBRL is not about rendering for reading purposes, it is a machine language for computers to interact with to do what computers do best – compute. Microsoft’s parsing of their XBRL database is interesting, but certainly, it could have been achieved with formats other than XBRL. As you mentioned, there are few options for rendering XBRL and maybe fewer to use this information the way it is meant to be used. Nonetheless, as you mention we have to start somewhere, and I do believe by beginning with the largest 500 companies, that information will be of interest to many parties and consumption tools will be developed.

I also find it amusing that the software vendors are high-fiving over this mandate. The SEC has done for them what they could not – convince the business community, that XBRL would add value by the “cheaper, faster, better” proposition. Forget “cheaper, faster, better,” its required!

Gary Purnhagen

]]>