Names for beta directory

For the beta directory (https://beta.lds.org/directory), where do the names for members come from? Specifically, what determines if just a first name, or a first and middle, or a preferred name is displayed?

In my particular case:

• On the beta directory my first and middle name are shown
• In MLS, my preferred name is simply my first name
• In CDOL, my name is shown with only my first and last name
• In the current LUWS, I have specified my preferred name to be my first name
• In my LDS Account, my Display Name is my first name and middle initial and last name; my first name is simply my first name

Given all this, I don't understand how the beta directory includes my middle name. Yet other people in the ward are listed without middle names; some are listed as Bob or Jim when I know that their full names in MLS are Robert and James.

Where is the preferred name for the beta directory specified?

Is it simply your full legal name from MLS?

Now that you point it out, I don't see a way for the user to edit their preferred name. Without knowing where it's getting it's information from, it seems to have less functionality then the current LUWS.

RussellHltn wrote:Is it simply your full legal name from MLS?

Now that you point it out, I don't see a way for the user to edit their preferred name. Without knowing where it's getting it's information from, it seems to have less functionality then the current LUWS.

Yes, it is my full legal name from MLS. It wouldn't be too surprising if that were the rule for the beta directory. But it clearly is not, as proven by people I know whose names show up without middle names, or even with shortened names, when I know for certain that their full names (including middle names) are in MLS.

Alan_Brown wrote:Yes, it is my full legal name from MLS. It wouldn't be too surprising if that were the rule for the beta directory. But it clearly is not, as proven by people I know whose names show up without middle names, or even with shortened names, when I know for certain that their full names (including middle names) are in MLS.

Perhaps a preferred name is specified in MLS, even though it is the same as their first legal name?

lajackson wrote:Perhaps a preferred name is specified in MLS, even though it is the same as their first legal name?

Indeed, those people with a name in the directory of Jim or Bob have that name specified as their MLS preferred name. But if the MLS preferred name were the source for names in the beta directory, then my middle name would not appear in the beta directory, since my MLS preferred name does not include my middle name.

The answer must be more complex than a single source -- there is no simple answer that could possibly fit all the cases I see.

Do you know if any of those sources had your middle name anytime recently (the last few months)?

I'm wondering if it's a old data.

Alan_Brown wrote:But if the MLS preferred name were the source for names in the beta directory, then my middle name would not appear in the beta directory, since my MLS preferred name does not include my middle name.

I see that the source would not be LUWS, since you said that is your first name.

Perhaps there is a setting in the beta directory for you to set a preferred name there? Maybe the beta is not getting the preferred name from anywhere? Or have none of those other folks logged into the beta?

And after that, I am out of ideas.

RussellHltn wrote:Do you know if any of those sources had your middle name anytime recently (the last few months)?

I'm wondering if it's a old data.

I'm pretty sure that CDOL included my middle name once upon a time, but now uses only my first name. All the other sources have been stable as I described them for multiple years.

But I would think that CDOL would be the least likely source to have an impact on the directory. Most members of the Church are not in CDOL, so that would be a strange source for a name in a member directory.

lajackson wrote:I see that the source would not be LUWS, since you said that is your first name.

Correct.

lajackson wrote:Perhaps there is a setting in the beta directory for you to set a preferred name there?

Not that I can find, and I've hunted all over.

lajackson wrote:Or have none of those other folks logged into the beta?

There are many members of my ward listed with their full name, and many listed with their preferred name. I would doubt that any more than a handful could possibly have logged into the beta. So there's no way that logging into the beta affects this.

lajackson wrote:And after that, I am out of ideas.

I was about to say the same thing, but I have just one more. See my next post.

I don't understand the logic behind this if it's true, but it's my last theory for now - perhaps it's pulling from a different source for you because you've logged into the beta.

I see my full legal name in beta, but then, I logged in to look. My middle name isn't in LUWS or MLS preferred. It is in the CDOL, and off hand I don't see where I change that.

I know it doesn't make much sense to pull from the CDOL, but then it has to pull from the CDOL to get user rights. Perhaps it's pulling from the same MLS data stream that refreshes the CDOL?

I just ran across one more interesting piece of information. I am now thinking that the directory may include either the full name from MLS or the preferred name from MLS. I can't find a single example in my ward that is not one or the other. But the numbers are so high for each case, that I can only conclude that which one is selected is relatively random (or at least determined by some non-obvious factor).

Here's the interesting situation: In one of the wards in my stake, there is a sister who has a different last name in her preferred name than in her full name. This causes the membership list to be sorted oddly. The member will be grouped in a separate group out of sequence. For example, if a person with full name "Jane Baker" had an MLS preferred name of "Jane Smith" then there would be the heading "A" with all the households with names that start with A, but then there would be a heading "S" with only "Jane Baker", then the heading "B" with all the names that start with B, etc.

That leads me to believe that the grouping by starting letter is done based on the preferred name, but the display of at least some of the names is done by full name. That shows that this part of the code is at least somewhat confused as to whether to use the full name or the preferred name. That confusion could easily extend to apparently random use of preferred names vs. full names in the display of member names.

I have reported both the odd grouping and the inconsistent use of preferred vs. full names using the Feedback link.

Alan_Brown wrote:(or at least determined by some non-obvious factor).

Time of last update to the membership record? Old-timers have full name. Move-ins or others who have recently had membership updates get their preferred names added to the data stream.

I'm thinking that a new data stream was added around MLS 3 to support the CDOL, etc. Unless MLS has had a reason to talk to CHQ about you, then CHQ doesn't know your MLS preferred name.

This is curious, cause I'm not getting quite the same thing.

All of the names in the list appear to be [Legal_Last_Name], [Preferred_First_Name]. Then, in the detail section, I'm seeing [Preferred_Last_Name], [Preferred_First_Name]. Every name is consistent with MLS on these criteria. In my entire directory, only one name shows up with the middle name included.

nutterb wrote:This is curious, cause I'm not getting quite the same thing.

By chance have you had a ward split or updated every one's address to standardize the format? (Perhaps to get the beta maps to work?) Something that would have caused the record to be updated since MLS 3.0?

Come to think of it, yes. When I was called about a year ago, nearly every member in the ward had the first and middle name in the preferred name field. In order to simplify formatting a photo directory, I manually went through and changed every preferred name to format in which I wanted it to appear.

I think I also standardized phone numbers and street abbreviations (St, Rd, Blvd, etc). So it is very likely that every member of my ward has been transmitted to Headquarters. You may be on to something.

RussellHltn wrote:By chance have you had a ward split or updated every one's address to standardize the format? (Perhaps to get the beta maps to work?) Something that would have caused the record to be updated since MLS 3.0?

You're pursuing an interesting theory, but there are plenty of counterexamples in my ward. For example, I know that my individual phone number was added to my individual membership record in December, yet my full name is used in the beta directory instead of my preferred name.

Perhaps it's related to actual updates to the preferred name, but I find it hard to believe that the roughly 50% of my ward members who are listed with preferred names all had their preferred name updated even in the last year.

So I'm still stumped.

Alan_Brown wrote:You're pursuing an interesting theory, but there are plenty of counterexamples in my ward. For example, I know that my individual phone number was added to my individual membership record in December, yet my full name is used in the beta directory instead of my preferred name.

Perhaps it's related to actual updates to the preferred name, but I find it hard to believe that the roughly 50% of my ward members who are listed with preferred names all had their preferred name updated even in the last year.

So I'm still stumped.

I am definitely not in the same tech league as most of you, but I am wondering that since this is still in beta, could it be that this is an issue that will be resolved before the full release?

zaneclark wrote:I am definitely not in the same tech league as most of you, but I am wondering that since this is still in beta, could it be that this is an issue that will be resolved before the full release?

Hopefully. I did report it using the feedback link. The developers may not have even been aware of the problem, so there are no guarantees, but it does seem like a big enough problem to warrant a fix before release.

Interesting... I just logged into the beta site ldsjobs.org using my LDS Account credentials and was greeted as [Legal_First_Name] [Legal_Middle_Name], instead of [First] [Last] as I would expect. Could this be a wide-spread bug with anything using an LDS Account login?

Mikerowaved wrote:Interesting... I just logged into the beta site ldsjobs.org using my LDS Account credentials and was greeted as [Legal_First_Name] [Legal_Middle_Name], instead of [First] [Last] as I would expect. Could this be a wide-spread bug with anything using an LDS Account login?

Fascinating. However, I would note that when I log into that site, I am greeted simply with my [First_Name], but on the beta directory my name is listed as "Last, First Middle". So it's the reverse of what you are seeing, but since it is so inconsistent, I suppose it could very well be a widespread bug with different manifestations.

Mikerowaved wrote:Interesting... I just logged into the beta site ldsjobs.org using my LDS Account credentials and was greeted as [Legal_First_Name] [Legal_Middle_Name], instead of [First] [Last] as I would expect. Could this be a wide-spread bug with anything using an LDS Account login?

Where are you looking? At the top next to "(Sign Out)"? I get "Welcome Russell". That's my legal first name as well as my preferred first name. It also matches my LDS Account "First Name".

This is really sounding like the great mystery of our time! Perhaps we should design an experiment. I'm willing to use some of the names in my ward as subjects.

It seems to me a good place to start the experiment is in the names that are being displayed correctly. If we change some of the names, it should propagate to the beta directory within 48 hours. If the changes propagate, then that would give us a clue as to what fields are tied to the names in the directory.

So, since all my names seem to be appearing correctly, I will do the following tomorrow evening:

• change three [Preferred_First_Name] to match the values in [Legal_First_Name]
• change three [Preferred_First_Name] that do not now reflect the person's actual preferred name to correctly display their preferred first name.

If these propagate to the directory in 48 hours, it will at least tell us that these are the relevant fields.

What other experimental units should we test?

(I know...I get overly excited about research. I'm a nerd, what can I say?)

nutterb wrote:What other experimental units should we test?

The first test I'd propose is to check the list against MLS (or at least LUWS) to insure that the beta directory is current and not a stale dataset. I know there were issues in the beta maps where locations where old.

nutterb wrote:This is really sounding like the great mystery of our time! Perhaps we should design an experiment. I'm willing to use some of the names in my ward as subjects.

nutterb wrote: What other experimental units should we test?

Or you could just look in the source since this is a community project.

ryan jones wrote:Or you could just look in the source since this is a community project.

Now who asked you to come along and spoil all my fun with sensible and logical suggestions?

<|:-(
(my attempt at drawing a dunce cap)

nutterb wrote:Now who asked you to come along and spoil all my fun with sensible and logical suggestions?

<|:-(
(my attempt at drawing a dunce cap)

You might find that your testing route will be useful too. I have a feeling it will go deep into internal systems.

RussellHltn wrote:Where are you looking? At the top next to "(Sign Out)"?

Yep. This is where I got Welcome Michael [Middle_Name]. (Note that "Mike" is my preferred name in MLS.)

ryan jones wrote:Or you could just look in the source since this is a community project.

The source code is not very helpful here. The directory code indicates that it uses the preferred name if it isn't blank and the 'formattedname' if it is. The preferred name and 'formattedname' come from the Community Services layer. We don't have access to the source for that layer in the community.

Assuming that the CMIS database schema is basically the same as the CODA schema (which I believe is the case), the 'formattedname' doesn't exist in CMIS. It just has name1, name2, familyname and preferredname so 'formattedname' must be something generated in the community service layer.

So this doesn't look like an issue the the directory code itself. It's probably something in the community service layer or in the sync process between MLS and CMIS (as RussellHltn has speculated).

eblood66 wrote:The source code is not very helpful here.

eblood66 wrote:So this doesn't look like an issue the the directory code itself. It's probably something in the community service layer or in the sync process between MLS and CMIS (as RussellHltn has speculated).

That is what I expected we would find. I will try and ask about that tomorrow.

RussellHltn wrote:My middle name isn't in LUWS or MLS preferred. It is in the CDOL, and off hand I don't see where I change that.

Alan_Brown wrote:I'm pretty sure that CDOL included my middle name once upon a time, but now uses only my first name.

So how did the CDOL drop your middle name? I was under the impression you changed it, but on re-reading, it sounds like it did it on it's own..

RussellHltn wrote:So how did the CDOL drop your middle name? I was under the impression you changed it, but on re-reading, it sounds like it did it on it's own..

CDOL has its own preferred name (which you can get to and change via the Edit Assignment link). I did go into that page on CDOL at some point. I don't remember if it originally had my first and middle, and I changed it to just my first name, but it definitely just shows my first name now.

But I really doubt that this particular data source in CDOL is connected to the beta directory -- it obviously does not apply to most people, since they can't login to CDOL, and besides, my issue is that the beta directory does include my middle name, but CDOL currently does not.

FWIW, I have noticed a similar phenomenon with my own name. The beta directory lists my full name, but I am listed with only my first name as preferred in both MLS and the legacy LUWS site.

I have just assumed that the new site eventually will be synced with MLS, and vice versa, and that all this data will end up integrated. But that assumption may turn out to be overly optimistic.

Alan_Brown wrote:Here's the interesting situation: In one of the wards in my stake, there is a sister who has a different last name in her preferred name than in her full name. This causes the membership list to be sorted oddly. The member will be grouped in a separate group out of sequence. For example, if a person with full name "Jane Baker" had an MLS preferred name of "Jane Smith" then there would be the heading "A" with all the households with names that start with A, but then there would be a heading "S" with only "Jane Baker", then the heading "B" with all the names that start with B, etc.

I have the same thing, except that the last name beginning with T is right in the middle to two B sections. The T section is inserted in between the two B sections at the place where the name would have appeared if it had been alphabetized with the B section.

What is interesting is that in the Membership Record there is no T name anywhere. The preferred name is identical to the full name.

Where is the T name coming from?

So I changed a few of the preferred name fields in MLS last night. This morning, all of the changes I made in MLS are reflected on the beta directory.

So it seems to me that the beta directory first names are being pulled from [Preferred_Name] in MLS. Perhaps try changing one or two in MLS and see what happens?

None of the changes in MLS are reflected on the legacy directory, nor would I expect them to be. I distinctly remember going through the legacy directory one day and changing all of the preferred name fields through the admin section. I believe on the legacy directory, users could change their own preferred name, and admins could change any preferred name.

My display name at job.lds.org still shows my first and middle name, even though I changed the [display_name] field in my LDS Account settings to just my first name on Monday.

lajackson wrote:The T section is inserted in between the two B sections at the place where the name would have appeared if it had been alphabetized with the B section.

When I log in to the beta directory, the ward directory list has several instances where a section ends, an out-of-order section appears with just one name, and the original section starts up again, ala the B - T - B scenario you discuss. I reported this via Feedback. The response was that the developer's would look at it.

lajackson wrote:Where is the T name coming from?

Interesting. The T name is coming from the Household field in MLS. After I call up the member record in MLS, clicking on the Household shows a different last name, which happens to be the name showing up in the beta directory of families.

So it appears that the beta is pulling the last name from the MLS Household file and the individual names from the individual file.

How the different household name got into MLS is another mystery. I do not know if it is from a prior relationship or what, or why it did not get changed to the current name.