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

AQ Reserve Ordinance Window occasional problem with Standard Place Names

Expand Messages
  • Stewart Millar
    Something strange with the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window. I note that when a candidate is added to the list it brings across the Qualifying events with the
    Message 1 of 22 , Jun 13, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Something strange with the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.



      I note that when a candidate is added to the list it brings across the
      "Qualifying" events with the associated date and place --- with the place
      being the "standardised" place name.



      I have several occurrences when for a selected individual on the list, the
      qualifying event is "Birth" and it correctly displays the birth date but has
      the place name left blank. For these individuals, there is actually a
      standardised place name present. Why is it not being brought across?



      Let me give you an example from nFS:



      Name: Maria Ward

      nFS PID: L7BG-5QQ



      This example is from a ward member I am assisting as a fh consultant.



      In the "Details" window you will note the "entered" place name is "St
      Saviour, Southwark, Surrey, England" --- hovering the cursor over the
      entered place name will display the "standardised" place name as "Southwark,
      Surrey, England, United Kingdom" (or alternatively using the edit button to
      display the details, but of course will tell you cannot edit this entry).



      On the majority of my entries in the Reserve Ordinance window (about 60%) it
      is getting it right with the standardised place name being brought across -
      but for the remaining 40% of entries, despite their being a standardised
      place name present, it has the place name blank in this Reserve Ordinance
      window.



      Any suggestions?



      And --- will it give me a problem further down the line, in that the minimum
      requirement for submissions is a name, date and place and here the proposed
      submission is showing without a place.



      === Stewart



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Tom Huber
      ... The Church recently added a considerable number of places to the list, many of which have more than four political divisions. I ve noticed that when the
      Message 2 of 22 , Jun 13, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 02:45:33 +0100, you wrote:

        >Something strange with the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.

        >I have several occurrences when for a selected individual on the list, the
        >qualifying event is "Birth" and it correctly displays the birth date but has
        >the place name left blank. For these individuals, there is actually a
        >standardised place name present. Why is it not being brought across?
        >
        The Church recently added a considerable number of places to the list,
        many of which have more than four political divisions. I've noticed
        that when the place has more than four political divisions, the place
        is not brought into the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.

        Hope this helps.

        Tom
      • Stewart Millar
        Thanks Tom - but in this case both the entered and standard (assigned by nFS) have each only 4 divisions. === Stewart From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
        Message 3 of 22 , Jun 13, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks Tom - but in this case both the "entered" and "standard" (assigned by
          nFS) have each only 4 divisions.



          === Stewart







          From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          Tom Huber
          Sent: 14 June 2010 02:52
          To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] AQ Reserve Ordinance Window occasional problem with
          Standard Place Names





          On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 02:45:33 +0100, you wrote:

          >Something strange with the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.

          >I have several occurrences when for a selected individual on the list, the
          >qualifying event is "Birth" and it correctly displays the birth date but
          has
          >the place name left blank. For these individuals, there is actually a
          >standardised place name present. Why is it not being brought across?
          >
          The Church recently added a considerable number of places to the list,
          many of which have more than four political divisions. I've noticed
          that when the place has more than four political divisions, the place
          is not brought into the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.

          Hope this helps.

          Tom





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Gunilla Manell
          I am not sure it what I have seen is the same thing or not, but when I add a person to the Reserve ordinances screen, before he or she has been linked, the
          Message 4 of 22 , Jun 13, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            I am not sure it what I have seen is the same thing or not, but when I add a
            person to the Reserve ordinances screen, before he or she has been linked,
            the place name shows. As soon as the link is complete, in most cases, the
            place name disappears.



            I have been wondering about this also, but it has been doing it ever since I
            started using AQ to reserve names. I have been doing it since a year ago,
            when my temple district finally got access to nFS.



            However in most cases, the cards print out OK including place names. And I
            say MOST, because sometimes it links up with a name that is not the
            preferred name, it even ignores the date I have uploaded and submitted, and
            the name may have become abbreviated instead of the spelled out name that I
            have uploaded. I sure wish the cards would print out with the complete
            information that I have submitted.



            /Gunilla





            From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            Stewart Millar
            Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 7:46 PM
            To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [AQ_NFS] AQ Reserve Ordinance Window occasional problem with
            Standard Place Names





            Something strange with the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.

            I note that when a candidate is added to the list it brings across the
            "Qualifying" events with the associated date and place --- with the place
            being the "standardised" place name.

            I have several occurrences when for a selected individual on the list, the
            qualifying event is "Birth" and it correctly displays the birth date but has
            the place name left blank. For these individuals, there is actually a
            standardised place name present. Why is it not being brought across?

            Let me give you an example from nFS:

            Name: Maria Ward

            nFS PID: L7BG-5QQ

            This example is from a ward member I am assisting as a fh consultant.

            In the "Details" window you will note the "entered" place name is "St
            Saviour, Southwark, Surrey, England" --- hovering the cursor over the
            entered place name will display the "standardised" place name as "Southwark,
            Surrey, England, United Kingdom" (or alternatively using the edit button to
            display the details, but of course will tell you cannot edit this entry).

            On the majority of my entries in the Reserve Ordinance window (about 60%) it
            is getting it right with the standardised place name being brought across -
            but for the remaining 40% of entries, despite their being a standardised
            place name present, it has the place name blank in this Reserve Ordinance
            window.

            Any suggestions?

            And --- will it give me a problem further down the line, in that the minimum
            requirement for submissions is a name, date and place and here the proposed
            submission is showing without a place.

            === Stewart

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





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Tom Huber
            ... The other thing that I ve noticed is that if the summary in nFS does not show a place, then the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window is also missing the place. I
            Message 5 of 22 , Jun 13, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 03:06:07 +0100, you wrote:

              >Thanks Tom - but in this case both the "entered" and "standard" (assigned by
              >nFS) have each only 4 divisions.
              >
              The other thing that I've noticed is that if the summary in nFS does
              not show a place, then the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window is also missing
              the place. I have to go into nFS manually and select the place for it
              to show. I don't know if Gaylon can do anything for the AQ Reserve
              Ordinance Window to use the place we have in our AQ/PAF file or if it
              will always default to the Summary View in nFS.

              You may want to play around with the Summary view to see if it makes
              any difference in the AQ Reserve Ordinance Window.

              Tom
            • Stewart Millar
              I continue to have a queasy feeling about the missing standard place name in the Reserve Ordinance window (ROW). As these missing place names do not reflect
              Message 6 of 22 , Jun 15, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                I continue to have a queasy feeling about the missing "standard" place name
                in the Reserve Ordinance window (ROW).



                As these missing place names do not reflect the situation in nFS - they
                therefore must indicate a problem in AQ.



                In further experiments I was able to alter an entry in the ROW which
                initially was displaying a standard place name - but it was an incorrect
                choice of standard place name - for an "entered" place name of "Cork,
                Ireland" it was displaying "Corcaigh, Ireland" i.e., using the Irish Gaelic
                name for "Cork" ------ so from the ROW I went into nFS and changed the
                standard name to the valid alternative standard place name of "Cork,
                Ireland" ---- on returning to the ROW, the previously displayed standard
                name disappeared with no replacement.



                An explanation scenario might be ----- this record was synched to nFS using
                AQ --- in doing so, AQ must have found and assigned the initial "standard"
                place name. It now seems to me that any time the "standard" name that was
                initially assigned via AQ is changed, the ROW becomes unable to find and
                display the existing "standard" place name from nFS.



                Any comment from Gaylon or the techies?



                === Stewart



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • emregister
                Yesterday a patron came to the FHC. She had two 3.5 inch floppy disks with data from the 1980s. Fortunately she had a USB stick with her. To transfer the
                Message 7 of 22 , Oct 6, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Yesterday a patron came to the FHC. She had two 3.5 inch floppy disks with
                  data from the 1980s. Fortunately she had a USB stick with her. To transfer
                  the data to the USB stick was straight forward. The patron intended to use
                  PAF but the data format was filename.dat and PAF did not recognize it. So..
                  AQ to the rescue. AQ recognized the data instantly and configured it to AQ
                  data. Then we asked AQ to configure the data for PAF. All was well and
                  took very little time. She left a very happy patron. Thanks AQ.



                  Eric



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • emregister
                  On a regular bases I review all batch files. There is a column completed which will contain some X s. I would expect that all ordinances that have been
                  Message 8 of 22 , Oct 6, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On a regular bases I 'review' all batch files. There is a column
                    'completed' which will contain some 'X's. I would expect that all
                    ordinances that have been reserved have been completed if there is an X in
                    the completed column. However, many times the X is there but the ordinances
                    are not yet completed. Any ideas/comments?



                    Eric



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Donald R. Snow
                    Many people aren t aware that all the earlier version of PAF are on the PAF CD that you get from the Distribution Centers and they are made so that they
                    Message 9 of 22 , Oct 6, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Many people aren't aware that all the earlier version of PAF are on
                      the PAF CD that you get from the Distribution Centers and they are made
                      so that they install in Windows. Using that any PAF database from an
                      earlier version can be opened in the appropriate PAF version and then
                      you can make a GEDCOM and import it into any newer genealogy program
                      that takes GEDCOM's. I haven't used AQ to upgrade from an older PAF
                      version, but I lost lots of links when I did the automatic upgrade in
                      PAF 4 and 5, so I don't recommend the automatic upgrade, but I use the
                      GEDCOM route.

                      Don


                      On 10/6/2010 10:03 PM, emregister wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Yesterday a patron came to the FHC. She had two 3.5 inch floppy disks with
                      > data from the 1980s. Fortunately she had a USB stick with her. To transfer
                      > the data to the USB stick was straight forward. The patron intended to use
                      > PAF but the data format was filename.dat and PAF did not recognize it.
                      > So..
                      > AQ to the rescue. AQ recognized the data instantly and configured it to AQ
                      > data. Then we asked AQ to configure the data for PAF. All was well and
                      > took very little time. She left a very happy patron. Thanks AQ.
                      >
                      > Eric
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >

                      --
                      Dr. Donald R. Snow, Retired Professor of Mathematics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah - snowd@...



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Gunilla Manell
                      From what I have seen with my data, when all ordinances that were cleared and printed on a card had been completed, the X would show the all ordinances on the
                      Message 10 of 22 , Oct 7, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        From what I have seen with my data, when all ordinances that were cleared
                        and printed on a card had been completed, the X would show the all
                        ordinances on the card were done.

                        If you haven't cleared seal to parents yet, then you still need to perform
                        that from a different card. Sealing to spouse is done from a different card
                        also.



                        I have not yet seen what you apparently have experienced. Just a thought,
                        did you update all, to transfer the dates to your database after ordinances
                        were performed?



                        /Gunilla



                        From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                        emregister
                        Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 10:11 PM
                        To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [AQ_NFS] Bath files are marked 'complete' but are not







                        On a regular bases I 'review' all batch files. There is a column
                        'completed' which will contain some 'X's. I would expect that all
                        ordinances that have been reserved have been completed if there is an X in
                        the completed column. However, many times the X is there but the ordinances
                        are not yet completed. Any ideas/comments?

                        Eric

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





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • emregister
                        This occurs with records that were reserved for the temple. If all ordinances were not reserved this does not appear to affect the X . It does not appear
                        Message 11 of 22 , Oct 7, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          This occurs with records that were reserved for the temple. If all
                          ordinances were not reserved this does not appear to affect the 'X'. It
                          does not appear to be related to 'updating'.



                          Eric

                          Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] Bath files are marked 'complete' but are not





                          From what I have seen with my data, when all ordinances that were cleared
                          and printed on a card had been completed, the X would show the all
                          ordinances on the card were done.

                          If you haven't cleared seal to parents yet, then you still need to perform
                          that from a different card. Sealing to spouse is done from a different card
                          also.

                          I have not yet seen what you apparently have experienced. Just a thought,
                          did you update all, to transfer the dates to your database after ordinances
                          were performed?

                          /Gunilla

                          From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
                          [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
                          Of
                          emregister
                          Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 10:11 PM
                          To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
                          Subject: [AQ_NFS] Bath files are marked 'complete' but are not

                          On a regular bases I 'review' all batch files. There is a column
                          'completed' which will contain some 'X's. I would expect that all
                          ordinances that have been reserved have been completed if there is an X in
                          the completed column. However, many times the X is there but the ordinances
                          are not yet completed. Any ideas/comments?

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