List of MLS Feature Requests

Discussions around using and interfacing with the Church MLS program.
jbh001
Senior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:17 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

#31

Post by jbh001 »

RussellHltn wrote:Tit's more efficient to use the route suggested by using the Google maps rather then personally visiting each home.
Most of the time this may be true. But half of my ward is in a county that only has rural routes and box numbers. Google Maps usually has no idea how to map these usefully. As I have stated elsewhere, there is little hope of that changing.
User avatar
Mikerowaved
Community Moderators
Posts: 4734
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:56 am
Location: Layton, UT

#32

Post by Mikerowaved »

jbh001 wrote:Most of the time this may be true. But half of my ward is in a county that only has rural routes and box numbers. Google Maps usually has no idea how to map these usefully. As I have stated elsewhere, there is little hope of that changing.
I believe your point is clearly understood. I think what is suggested here is to use mapping software to get as many "hits" as you can, then you will have to rely on other means to track what is left.

'Other means' might also include locating a rural home using the images available in Google Earth (or another aerial photo tool) image and place a pin on it. It will then give you the precise GPS coordinates.

These are only time and gas saving suggestions and will certainly need to be adapted for each unit's circumstances.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
jbh001
Senior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:17 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

#33

Post by jbh001 »

The Earl wrote:Given these basic failings of GPS data, the current implementation in MLS is to have a 'geocode' field that is open to implementation details decided at the local level.
Are you referring to ward geo codes and stake geo codes, or something else? If this is what you are referring to, these fields are limited to 8 characters (unless MLS 2.8 has expanded the limit). I had requested that these fields be expanded to at least 11 digits so that they could contain an entire numeric representation of a delivery point barcode (ZIP+4+2). However the field might need to be expanded to 31 characters in 2009 because of OneCode and Intelligent Mail Barcoding, then again perhaps not.
The_Earl
Member
Posts: 278
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:12 am

#34

Post by The_Earl »

jbh001 wrote:Are you referring to ward geo codes and stake geo codes, or something else? If this is what you are referring to, these fields are limited to 8 characters (unless MLS 2.8 has expanded the limit). I had requested that these fields be expanded to at least 11 digits so that they could contain an entire numeric representation of a delivery point barcode (ZIP+4+2). However the field might need to be expanded to 31 characters in 2009 because of OneCode and Intelligent Mail Barcoding, then again perhaps not.
I think so. I can't remember that level of detail, but it sounds right.

Thanks for the request. It is probably good that you entered it here, so that people can 'me too' it.

Thanks
The Earl
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34417
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#35

Post by russellhltn »

The Earl wrote:GPS data is nice, but is US centric
US Centric? In what way? Yes, it's funded by the US Taxpayer and to date most of the equipment has been for the US market, but I can say first hand that my Garmin was quite happy to work in Japan. (Getting a lock among the buildings is another story, but I had that problem in parts of the US as well.)

If we use lon/lat, then that's a universal notation and you can use your choice of method to obtain it.
The_Earl
Member
Posts: 278
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:12 am

#36

Post by The_Earl »

RussellHltn wrote:US Centric? In what way? Yes, it's funded by the US Taxpayer and to date most of the equipment has been for the US market, but I can say first hand that my Garmin was quite happy to work in Japan. (Getting a lock among the buildings is another story, but I had that problem in parts of the US as well.)

If we use lon/lat, then that's a universal notation and you can use your choice of method to obtain it.
GPS is US centric in the following ways:
Equipment is (or at least has been) almost exclusively available in the US
The system is owned by the US
Access to the system is controlled by the US
Accuracy and availability of your equipment is controlled by the US and by US export laws

Yes it works worldwide, but why is the EU building its own system?

I think we have strayed a bit from the original thread, so I will drop this here. I will join you on a separate thread if you would like.
The Earl
User avatar
Mikerowaved
Community Moderators
Posts: 4734
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:56 am
Location: Layton, UT

#37

Post by Mikerowaved »

jbh001 wrote:Are you referring to ward geo codes and stake geo codes, or something else? If this is what you are referring to, these fields are limited to 8 characters (unless MLS 2.8 has expanded the limit).
Nope. Still 8 characters in 2.8.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34417
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#38

Post by russellhltn »

The Earl wrote:GPS is US centric in the following ways:
Thanks for the info. I didn't think GPS was US centric enough to be a problem for the average user.

But unless we're suggesting that MLS be able to link with a GPS unit to upload or download waypoints, I doubt if it really matters. There is really nothing US centric about lat/lon. Or am I wrong again?

The coordinate system might be an issue, but I'd expect the whole ward if not the whole stake to be on the same system. I would assume they choose the best system for them.
bkjohnson-p40
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:43 pm

#39

Post by bkjohnson-p40 »

In addition to Melchizedek Priesthood ordinations updates originating from the Stake and being pushed to the wards, I believe it would be easier, more accurate and more appropriate if Stake callings followed the same pattern. A best practice for accurate records is for those that have the greatest interest in it accuracy to be the keepers (updaters) of it.
Boozer-p40
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:11 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area, South

Aaronic Priesthood form name sort criteria deficiency

#40

Post by Boozer-p40 »

When filling in the Aaronic Priesthood Ordination form on MLS, the names presented are sorted to show only “eligible Men.” The sort needs one more filter: “Baptized & Confirmed”
We have a boy that his mother and he himself said was baptized, but the records didn’t show it. Even with no baptism date or confirmation date in MLS, his name was presented in the sorted list to fill in the form with.
We didn’t find the error until we tried to enter the ordination record. We got the error message, “Confirmation date is required.”
Locked

Return to “MLS Support, Help, and Feedback”