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

reserving and submitting names to temples and printing FORs

Expand Messages
  • register
    Gaylon, People in our area are exploring AQ and RootsMagic. The sentence arrived in an email this morning from FamilySearch. It sounds like an interesting
    Message 1 of 28 , May 7, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Gaylon,



      People in our area are exploring AQ and RootsMagic.



      The sentence arrived in an email this morning from FamilySearch. It sounds
      like an interesting feature.



      RootsMagic 4 is the first software affiliate product that is certified to
      reserve and submit ancestral names to temples to print LDS temple name cards
      using new FamilySearch Web services.



      Does AQ have anything in the near future that will enable users to do the
      same sort of thing?



      Eric







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • register
      To set up favourite sites is straight forward. To search these sites is not - at least for me. If I could see the entire URL for the default locations that
      Message 2 of 28 , May 7, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        To set up favourite sites is straight forward. To search these sites is not
        - at least for me. If I could see the entire URL for the default locations
        that would help but, alas, I cannot. Can anyone lend a hand or direct me to
        a solution?

        For example, I want to go directly to FamilySearch Record Search and search
        for the selected name in the same fashion as Ancestry.com. I can go
        directly to Record Search but cannot get the first and last names and search
        to work.

        Eric

        .


        <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=25229696/grpspId=1709334992/msgI
        d=33/stime=1240069700/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3>





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Gaylon Findlay
        Eric: In a word, yes. Unfortunately, the FamilySearch system didn t allow ordinance reservations when AQ became the first product to synchronize local data
        Message 3 of 28 , May 7, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Eric:

          In a word, yes.

          Unfortunately, the FamilySearch system didn't allow ordinance
          reservations when AQ became the first product to synchronize local data
          with nFS. They made that available just shortly before RootsMagic was
          released, so RM was able to fit that in. We have been working for some
          time on a feature that will allow the reservation and tracking of
          ordinances, and hope to have it available soon.

          Gaylon


          register wrote:
          > Gaylon,
          >
          >
          >
          > People in our area are exploring AQ and RootsMagic.
          >
          >
          >
          > The sentence arrived in an email this morning from FamilySearch. It sounds
          > like an interesting feature.
          >
          >
          >
          > RootsMagic 4 is the first software affiliate product that is certified to
          > reserve and submit ancestral names to temples to print LDS temple name cards
          > using new FamilySearch Web services.
          >
          >
          >
          > Does AQ have anything in the near future that will enable users to do the
          > same sort of thing?
          >
          >
          >
          > Eric
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • register
          Gaylon, That is good news. I will get the information to our staff. Eric Eric & Marnie Abell Saanichton, BC, Canada (250) 652 4616 ... From:
          Message 4 of 28 , May 7, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Gaylon,

            That is good news. I will get the information to our staff.



            Eric



            Eric & Marnie Abell

            Saanichton, BC, Canada

            (250) 652 4616

            -----Original Message-----
            From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            Gaylon Findlay
            Sent: May 7, 2009 2:49 PM
            To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] reserving and submitting names to temples and printing
            FORs








            Eric:

            In a word, yes.

            Unfortunately, the FamilySearch system didn't allow ordinance
            reservations when AQ became the first product to synchronize local data
            with nFS. They made that available just shortly before RootsMagic was
            released, so RM was able to fit that in. We have been working for some
            time on a feature that will allow the reservation and tracking of
            ordinances, and hope to have it available soon.

            Gaylon

            register wrote:
            > Gaylon,
            >
            >
            >
            > People in our area are exploring AQ and RootsMagic.
            >
            >
            >
            > The sentence arrived in an email this morning from FamilySearch. It sounds
            > like an interesting feature.
            >
            >
            >
            > RootsMagic 4 is the first software affiliate product that is certified to
            > reserve and submit ancestral names to temples to print LDS temple name
            cards
            > using new FamilySearch Web services.
            >
            >
            >
            > Does AQ have anything in the near future that will enable users to do the
            > same sort of thing?
            >
            >
            >
            > Eric
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • register
            When I ask AQ to review an individual in FS I get a display that gives me, among other things, the NFS ID. It also lets me know how may other IDs exist. Let
            Message 5 of 28 , Jun 23, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              When I ask AQ to review an individual in FS I get a display that gives me,
              among other things, the NFS ID. It also lets me know how may other IDs
              exist. Let us say 21.



              If I go into nFS and look at the numbers of records hat have been combined
              for the same person I get a difference count - say 17.



              If I us AQ to do some additional searching and find another duplicate and
              then combine these the numbers referred to above will change to 22 and 18.



              My problem is that I expected these two numbers to be the same. That is, if
              17 records have been combined then AQ would show me that there were 16 other
              IDs. That is, the current record ID and 16 others to get 17.



              Why the apparent discrepancy between nFS and AQ?





              Eric



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Stewart Millar
              I have the same issue appearing in my checks between AQ and nFS. The smaller numbers 2,3,4 duplicates do agree - but with some of the bigger numbers I have the
              Message 6 of 28 , Jun 23, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                I have the same issue appearing in my checks between AQ and nFS.



                The smaller numbers 2,3,4 duplicates do agree - but with some of the bigger
                numbers I have the problem - AQ says 15 Other ID's and yet the nFS combined
                records says 12 combined records.



                A possibility that I have not yet had the time (or patience) to check is
                ---- I wonder if any one of the 12 combined records in nFS is itself a
                combined record of a further 3 records that would make the AQ number agree
                with nFS. If what I have suggested is a possibility, then when there is a
                difference, the AQ number should always be bigger than the nFS number.



                === Stewart



                From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                register
                Sent: 23 June 2009 13:07
                To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [AQ_NFS] AQ and combined nFS








                When I ask AQ to review an individual in FS I get a display that gives me,
                among other things, the NFS ID. It also lets me know how may other IDs
                exist. Let us say 21.

                If I go into nFS and look at the numbers of records hat have been combined
                for the same person I get a difference count - say 17.

                If I us AQ to do some additional searching and find another duplicate and
                then combine these the numbers referred to above will change to 22 and 18.

                My problem is that I expected these two numbers to be the same. That is, if
                17 records have been combined then AQ would show me that there were 16 other
                IDs. That is, the current record ID and 16 others to get 17.

                Why the apparent discrepancy between nFS and AQ?

                Eric

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • register
                Stewart, you may be right. I checked a few small duplicates and yes they do agree. Eric To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] AQ and combined nFS I
                Message 7 of 28 , Jun 23, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Stewart, you may be right. I checked a few small duplicates and yes they do
                  agree.

                  Eric

                  To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] AQ and combined nFS





                  I have the same issue appearing in my checks between AQ and nFS.

                  The smaller numbers 2,3,4 duplicates do agree - but with some of the bigger
                  numbers I have the problem - AQ says 15 Other ID's and yet the nFS combined
                  records says 12 combined records.

                  A possibility that I have not yet had the time (or patience) to check is
                  ---- I wonder if any one of the 12 combined records in nFS is itself a
                  combined record of a further 3 records that would make the AQ number agree
                  with nFS. If what I have suggested is a possibility, then when there is a
                  difference, the AQ number should always be bigger than the nFS number.

                  === Stewart

                  From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups. <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> com
                  [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups. <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> com] On Behalf
                  Of
                  register
                  Sent: 23 June 2009 13:07
                  To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups. <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> com
                  Subject: [AQ_NFS] AQ and combined nFS

                  When I ask AQ to review an individual in FS I get a display that gives me,
                  among other things, the NFS ID. It also lets me know how may other IDs
                  exist. Let us say 21.

                  If I go into nFS and look at the numbers of records hat have been combined
                  for the same person I get a difference count - say 17.

                  If I us AQ to do some additional searching and find another duplicate and
                  then combine these the numbers referred to above will change to 22 and 18.

                  My problem is that I expected these two numbers to be the same. That is, if
                  17 records have been combined then AQ would show me that there were 16 other
                  IDs. That is, the current record ID and 16 others to get 17.

                  Why the apparent discrepancy between nFS and AQ?

                  Eric

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Gaylon Findlay
                  When AQ accesses a record from nFS, it is given a list of all the nFS IDs by which that record has been known. AQ simply counts these and displays that number,
                  Message 8 of 28 , Jun 23, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    When AQ accesses a record from nFS, it is given a list of all the nFS
                    IDs by which that record has been known. AQ simply counts these and
                    displays that number, minus the current number, as the number displayed
                    is meant to convey "Other" IDs, not "Total" IDs. You will often see a
                    count of 0 when you look at a record that has never been combined with
                    another record.

                    I don't know the full set of rules for when nFS creates a new ID for a
                    person, but I believe you could have a situation like this:

                    Bob Smith - ID1
                    Bob Smith - ID2
                    Robert Smith - ID3

                    When you combine ID1 and ID2, you end up with:

                    Bob Smith - ID4 (Includes ID1 and ID2)
                    Robert Smith - ID3

                    Then when you combine ID4 and ID3, you en up with:

                    Robert (Bob) Smith - ID5 (Includes ID1, ID2, ID3 and ID4)

                    So nFS's "Combined Records" screen for ID5 would show 3 original
                    records. But AQ's display of Other IDs for ID5 would show 4 other IDs.

                    Both displays are accurate. nFS is not showing you all the IDs by which
                    the person can be accessed -- it is showing the original records. AQ is
                    showing a count of other IDs. Actual original records would often be
                    somewhat fewer.

                    Hope this helps.

                    Gaylon


                    register wrote:
                    > Stewart, you may be right. I checked a few small duplicates and yes they do
                    > agree.
                    >
                    > Eric
                    >
                    > To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] AQ and combined nFS
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > I have the same issue appearing in my checks between AQ and nFS.
                    >
                    > The smaller numbers 2,3,4 duplicates do agree - but with some of the bigger
                    > numbers I have the problem - AQ says 15 Other ID's and yet the nFS combined
                    > records says 12 combined records.
                    >
                    > A possibility that I have not yet had the time (or patience) to check is
                    > ---- I wonder if any one of the 12 combined records in nFS is itself a
                    > combined record of a further 3 records that would make the AQ number agree
                    > with nFS. If what I have suggested is a possibility, then when there is a
                    > difference, the AQ number should always be bigger than the nFS number.
                    >
                    > === Stewart
                    >
                    > From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups. <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> com
                    > [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups. <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> com] On Behalf
                    > Of
                    > register
                    > Sent: 23 June 2009 13:07
                    > To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups. <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> com
                    > Subject: [AQ_NFS] AQ and combined nFS
                    >
                    > When I ask AQ to review an individual in FS I get a display that gives me,
                    > among other things, the NFS ID. It also lets me know how may other IDs
                    > exist. Let us say 21.
                    >
                    > If I go into nFS and look at the numbers of records hat have been combined
                    > for the same person I get a difference count - say 17.
                    >
                    > If I us AQ to do some additional searching and find another duplicate and
                    > then combine these the numbers referred to above will change to 22 and 18.
                    >
                    > My problem is that I expected these two numbers to be the same. That is, if
                    > 17 records have been combined then AQ would show me that there were 16 other
                    > IDs. That is, the current record ID and 16 others to get 17.
                    >
                    > Why the apparent discrepancy between nFS and AQ?
                    >
                    > Eric
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.