LUWS Calender

[skiptaylor]

I would like to see a few things done with calendaring. Some have been mentioned already I'm sure.

• Ability to do "every 1st Sunday" etc with exceptions or from-til dates.
• Resource calendars should have more than a major resource. Example would be "Cultural Hall" "Rm 104" "R/S Room" etc.
• Resource calendars should have the event calendar as a layer so you don't have to swap back and forth to check events vs. resource use.
• When entering calendar items, it might be nice to have submissions have the ability to also specify resources needed for the event. These would go to the resource calendar as well.
• Print more than one calendar at a time.
• Print a merged calendar of resources & events (layered ?)

Those are my current thoughts based on recently seen needs in the current calendaring system.

[segbert]

I'd like to be able to import and export the events to/from a CSV, ICS (iCalendar), and other formats.

Edit - I just noticed that you can export as CSV, iCal, or vCal, but I'd still like to be able to import items in bulk.

[dainapettit]

I'd like to be able to import and export the events to/from a CSV, ICS (iCalendar), and other formats.

Edit - I just noticed that you can export as CSV, iCal, or vCal, but I'd still like to be able to import items in bulk.

Our stake exec. sec. just completed entering our entire stake calendar for 2009 to Google Calendars! I told him beforehand that doing it this way would probably require double entry to the calendar on the stake web site since I've not seen an import available.

Entering the stake calendar is the MOST TEDIOUS job for the web sites--with hundreds of individual submissions to do for the whole year! Now we have to do it twice!

I've been considering writing a script (probably in perl) to automate calendar entry so I can export from Google Calendars, format it, and submit the data in batch mode.

Has anyone already done this? I can't imagine it would be all that hard to provide an import capability on the server side. Just give me a format and let me upload!

[RossEvans]

Our stake exec. sec. just completed entering our entire stake calendar for 2009 to Google Calendars! I told him beforehand that doing it this way would probably require double entry to the calendar on the stake web site since I've not seen an import available.

Entering the stake calendar is the MOST TEDIOUS job for the web sites--with hundreds of individual submissions to do for the whole year! Now we have to do it twice!

I've been considering writing a script (probably in perl) to automate calendar entry so I can export from Google Calendars, format it, and submit the data in batch mode.

Has anyone already done this? I can't imagine it would be all that hard to provide an import capability on the server side. Just give me a format and let me upload!

Before undertaking the technical task, your stake should first be sure that the practice of using Google Calendars does not violate Church policy. The First Presidency several years ago prohibited the use of outside web sites by local units.

Putting that aside, I know of no facility for batch import of any data to LUWS for any purpose. The screen interface is what is provided, and it is what it is. It would be nice to provide limited import capability of various data -- to LUWS as well as MLS -- but I have not seen any positive reaction to those suggestions from CHQ.

[techgy]

Before undertaking the technical task, your stake should first be sure that the practice of using Google Calendars does not violate Church policy. The First Presidency several years ago prohibited the use of outside web sites by local units.

The reference to the policy you're referring to is:
http://www.lds.org/Static%20Files/PDF/S ... letter.pdf

I haven't seen anything since the above that would change their policy regarding un-approved web sites.

[dainapettit]

The reference to the policy you're referring to is:
http://www.lds.org/Static%20Files/PDF/S ... letter.pdf

I haven't seen anything since the above that would change their policy regarding un-approved web sites.

I don't know if this qualifies as a violation of the policy. I believe they are using Google Calendars to integrate the personal calendars of the stake leadership with the stake calendar. As far as I know it's private and only for the leadership. Other than being hosted in a private fashion on a public server, it is conceptually no different than downloading the stake calendar to your iPhone...well except that it went the wrong direction!

I understand the intent of the policy is to present a unified consistent web presence that meets needs of the leadership, membership, and others. If it turns out this is a violation I'll inform the leadership and I'm sure they'll terminate it.

[mkmurray]

I understand the intent of the policy is to present a unified consistent web presence that meets needs of the leadership, membership, and others. If it turns out this is a violation I'll inform the leadership and I'm sure they'll terminate it.

I'm not saying whether you are or are not in violation of the policy, but there are many of us that believe the policy is less for a consistent look and feel and more for a consistent level of security and trust in where this information is being stored. It appears the Church tends to discourage hosting sensitive information coming from Church systems on non-Church web servers and computer networks. Again, I have made no comment regarding calendaring items nor the security of private Google calendars.

[RossEvans]

I don't know if this qualifies as a violation of the policy. ...As far as I know it's private and only for the leadership ....

The consensus around this forum, as I understand it, does not necessarily make such a distinction to determine what is allowable. A significant line seems to be drawn with respect to third-party servers, even if access is password protected. Email is an exception to that generalization. In particular, we have been cautioned against uploading content extracted from MLS or LUWS to third-party servers. AFAIK, calendaring information has not been addressed specifically.

Not all the policy guidance is intuitively consistent. And you likely won't find a definitive policy document that spells out all the details, because the Church has not issued one. You might get some private guidance if you ask. Ultimately, responsibility for interpreting policy rests with your priesthood leaders, but they might want to inquire about this through their own channels. The last time our ward faced a decison on a borderline issue, we sought private guidance from mid-level staff at CHQ and the Bishop made his call after considering that.

[techgy]

I have to wonder what would happen if, over time, hundreds of wards and stakes began moving data away from the Church systems and into third-party servers, etc.? Just a thought.

I'm of the opinion that we'd be better off using the technology that's provided. If we see a need to encourage or recommend changes then there's a way of doing that by contact those who shoulder that responsibility at CHQ.

This isn't official - just my own $0.02 but a lot of hard work, experimentation and prayer has gone into providing us the technology we current have and I feel safer using Church facilities than going off on my own.

[jbh001]

I don't know if this qualifies as a violation of the policy. I believe they are using Google Calendars to integrate the personal calendars of the stake leadership with the stake calendar. As far as I know it's private and only for the leadership. Other than being hosted in a private fashion on a public server, it is conceptually no different than downloading the stake calendar to your iPhone...well except that it went the wrong direction!

Yet another reason why LUWS 2.0 should have a secure subscription option to the ward/stake calendar: At least one unit has taken matter into their own hands (for better or for worse).