Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [AQ_NFS] Failed to update Sub date

Expand Messages
  • Peter
    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
    Message 1 of 9 , Sep 26, 2013
      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@...>
      To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
      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
      >Update Ordinances.
      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:

      >Hi,
      >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?
      >
      >
      > Peter


    • thomas_nevin_huber
      Appears to be a bug, then. (You did not state that you had only reserved the names, just that you had reserved them. You did not indicate that you had done
      Message 2 of 9 , Sep 27, 2013
        Appears to be a bug, then.

        (You did not state that you had "only" reserved the names, just that
        you had reserved them. You did not indicate that you had done nothing
        else with them.)

        In rereading what you wrote, there appears to be a difference in what
        happens with the Baptism and Endowment, as compared to sealings, when
        you first reserve them.

        Gaylon needs to look at this.

        Tom

        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@...>
        >To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
        >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
        >>Update Ordinances.
        >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:
        >
        >>Hi,
        >>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?
        >>
        >>
        >> Peter
        >
        >
      • thomas_nevin_huber
        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
        Message 3 of 9 , Oct 3, 2013
          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
          seeing.

          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
          ordinances.

          Tom

          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@...>
          >To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
          >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
          >>Update Ordinances.
          >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:
          >
          >>Hi,
          >>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?
          >>
          >>
          >> Peter
          >
          >
        • ghfindlay
          Let me provide an explanation for what you are seeing. After AQ finishes reserving the ordinances in FamilySearch, it then attempts to update your file with
          Message 4 of 9 , Dec 11, 2013
            Let me provide an explanation for what you are seeing.

            After AQ finishes reserving the ordinances in FamilySearch, it then attempts to update your file with the new ordinance information.

            For individual ordinances such as Baptism and Endowment, there is never any question, so these are always updated.

            However, AQ will only update sealing ordinances when it is sure that it is updating the proper relationship.

            If you have first matched and linked the spouse or parents of a person to the corresponding records in Family Tree, and then you reserve a sealing ordinance between the person and his spouse or parents, then the sealing field in AQ will be updated as you expect, with "Sub DD MMM YYYY". However, if you reserve a sealing for a different spouse, or to different parents, AQ will not put erroneous sealing information into your file.

            Similarly, if you have not yet linked the spouse or parents, yet you reserve a sealing ordinance, AQ will not update your file, because it can't be sure of which relationship is being affected.

            Bottom line:

            If a sealing is reserved, and you have properly linked all parties to the relationship, then AQ will record the ordinance information in your file. If you have note properly linked all parties to the relationship, AQ will not record the ordinance information in your file.

            Gaylon



            --- In AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com, Peter <peters_genealogy@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi,
            > 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?
            >
            >
            >  Peter
            >
          • Peter
            Thanks Gaylon, that makes sense.  I might not like it, but I can understand why a computer program does not presume there is a relationship if it has (through
            Message 5 of 9 , Dec 11, 2013
              Thanks Gaylon, that makes sense.  I might not like it, but I can understand why a computer program does not presume there is a relationship if it has (through syncing) been told there is one.

              So if I understand correctly the way around this is either sync the records, or when updating don't click on  "Update all" and manually put check marks one by one in all the proper sealing ordinance fields to have them update my own data.

              Appreciate you taking time to answer. 
              Thank you very much.
               
              Peter


              On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:18:01 AM, "gfindlay@..." <gfindlay@...> wrote:
               
              Let me provide an explanation for what you are seeing.

              After AQ finishes reserving the ordinances in FamilySearch, it then attempts to update your file with the new ordinance information.

              For individual ordinances such as Baptism and Endowment, there is never any question, so these are always updated.

              However, AQ will only update sealing ordinances when it is sure that it is updating the proper relationship.

              If you have first matched and linked the spouse or parents of a person to the corresponding records in Family Tree, and then you reserve a sealing ordinance between the person and his spouse or parents, then the sealing field in AQ will be updated as you expect, with "Sub DD MMM YYYY". However, if you reserve a sealing for a different spouse, or to different parents, AQ will not put erroneous sealing information into your file.

              Similarly, if you have not yet linked the spouse or parents, yet you reserve a sealing ordinance, AQ will not update your file, because it can't be sure of which relationship is being affected.

              Bottom line:

              If a sealing is reserved, and you have properly linked all parties to the relationship, then AQ will record the ordinance information in your file. If you have note properly linked all parties to the relationship, AQ will not record the ordinance information in your file.

              Gaylon

              --- In AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com, Peter <peters_genealogy@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi,
              > 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?
              >
              >
              >  Peter
              >



            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.