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

RE: RE: [AQ_NFS] AQ Reserve Ordinance Window occasional problem with Standard Place Names

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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.