I just reserved (only) two names for temple work for myself. In
checking the names, they show Sub 3 Oct 2013 in all fields (including
the sealings to both parents and spouse) on the AQ side and Reserved
on the FT side. No FOR has been printed at this point. In FT, all the
fields (including the sealings) show "Not Printed" and "Reserved by
Tom Huber". This is as it should be, so I'm not sure what you are
You may want to try rebuilding your AQ database if you are still
seeing a discrepancy. I was doing some checking for other quirks and
had just rebuilt the AQ database before reserving the names and
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 20:30:59 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>Tom, I totally am lost on the reply you posted. Why would you presume things if I clearly stated that I only reserved the names?
>No FOR was printed and No names where assigned to the temple.
> From: "tomhuber.yah@..." <tomhuber.yah@...>
>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:38:41 PM
>Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] Failed to update Sub date
>>This may be a bug, since I haven't reserved any names under the latest
>>update, the names. But in checking my batch files, there appear to be
>>some changes in the way the system is marking names.
>>Under "Update LDS Temple Ordinances" in the ORTS (Ordinance
>>Reservation and Tracking System), make sure the "Update from
>"Submitted (with date)" to "In Progress" is checked. Then rerun the
>If that is so why would the Baptism and Endowments have the proper "Sub 26 Sep 2013" added, but this date has not been added to the sealing fields? The sealing fields are totally blank in my AQ data but all show "Reserved" in FT
>>Note that until the temple picks up the names (for those submitted to
>>the temple), they show as Reserved. Once the temple picks up the
>>names, they show as In Process. This allows you to "unreserve" a name
>>and then reserve it for you to do the work.
>At no time did I say I assigned the names to the temple file. All are reserved in my name. Even so, if this was thru why would the Baptism and Endowment have the proper "Sub 26 Sep 2013" added to the AQ data and have "Reserved" showing on FT?
>>Right now, it appears that all names that you have reserved for you,
>>and printed a FOR for, are now marked as "In Progress". Previously
>>these, were marked as "Reserved" only. If you have not printed the
>>FOR, but have reserved the name, it should appear as "Reserved".
>At no time did I say I printed the FOR. Like I made clear in my original post I only reserved the names with AQ and did nothing else. If I had printed the FOR and ran the update the "Sub 26 Sep 2013" in B and E would have changed to "In Progress" too. It did not.
>On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:27:48 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>>just reserved several families for temple ordinances and noticed that all the Baptism and Endowment date fields are properly marked as "Sub 26 Sep 2013"
>>However all the reserved sealings have not been updated. Right click on each reserved name and selecting the "Review with FamilySearch" option brings up the FT ordinances and all show "Reserved" as it supposed to do.
>>AQ however failed to update the sealing date fields with "Sub 26 Sep 2013"
>>Anybody else see the same thing?