Hi there, sorry for the super late response - I’ve only just seen your reply.
Yes, Triple-entry is quite a confusing term because we are not creating a third entry, we are just linking two separate double entries. That link ensures that the two double entries in separate legal entities are always the same.
In the blog post you link to, we can treat the Corda state object as the “third entry” or link for the journal entries in each entity. For example:
- Alice and Bob trade. They create a Corda state object.
- Alice and Bob now need to post accounting entries in respect of this transaction.
- They take the Corda state data, pass in some other info like accounting rules and some balance sheet/ P&L account metadata and produce a journal entry.
- The journal they just produced points to the State reference of the corda state that was used to create the journal.
- As the journals created in Alice and Bob’s accounting system point to the Corda state object we can assure: completeness, existence, value and rights&obligations of the data transaction.
We don’t really need a third party to store the data, a hash of the data is sufficient. Contrary to what most people in this space say… it’s unlikely that either party would lose the data. Google never loses your data, for example… They just back it up and Alice/Bob would do the same. You need to back up the data anyway as the enriched accounting information regarding the transaction is not shared with the counter-party (you never share accounting records with counter-parties).
So yes, I’d say Corda is still a triple entry system. In fact, by design, its probably the only one that is appropriate for us by large companies (provides tx confidentiality, scales well, easy to integrate with existing systems)
Feel free to ask me more on slack (I’m roger3cev).