How can I get names to show up on maps?

At new.lds.org/maps, I can get each household to show up as a pip on the map, but what would really be useful would be for the name of the member to be displayed also. Is there any way to do this?

The stake president wants a map showing all the members in three wards. Looks like they are going to be rearranging ward boundaries. Any suggestions on how to do this?

takahashi wrote:At new.lds.org/maps, I can get each household to show up as a pip on the map, but what would really be useful would be for the name of the member to be displayed also. Is there any way to do this?

There is a "print friendly version" of the page accessible from the interface control at the bottom of the map -- it's the fourth button from the left and looks like a printer. That will open a new window or tab in your browser with the map with numbers by each household, and then a legend below that will say: "1: Adams, John and Abigail; 2: Brown, William and Mary; 3: ..." formatted in columns. It's been a while since I have done this, and this morning I'm getting a server-side error, so I can't give more details right now, but check out that option -- it might work for you.

takahashi wrote:The stake president wants a map showing all the members in three wards. Looks like they are going to be rearranging ward boundaries. Any suggestions on how to do this?

You can show one ward or the entire stake. And you can print one ward or the entire stake (as I explained in my previous post). But there's no option for selecting some number of wards other than one or all, at least that I can find.

You could generate each ward's map on the screen in turn, then use Alt+PrtSc to copy the browser window to the clipboard, then paste into a graphics program and try to reassemble the three wards. You'd have to be careful with zoom ratios and it would be a bit of a jigsaw puzzle exercise, but you might be able to make that work. For the legend, you would have numbers 1-100 (or whatever) for each ward, so you might use color coding to distinguish among the three wards on the merged map.

Alan_Brown wrote:...and this morning I'm getting a server-side error, so I can't give more details right now, but check out that option -- it might work for you.

Thanks for the suggestions. I have also been getting a "Sorry, an error occurred processing this page" message when trying to use the print friendly version option. Anyone have any idea how long this feature will be out of commission?

takahashi wrote:Thanks for the suggestions. I have also been getting a "Sorry, an error occurred processing this page" message when trying to use the print friendly version option. Anyone have any idea how long this feature will be out of commission?

I did a bit more research and discovered that the print-friendly page is not completely out of commission. Our stake has 7 wards plus the stake map; of those 8 units, 6 consistently give the server-side error, but 2 consistently work.

For the two wards that work, I was able to see that there are some nice new options available from the Display Options button since the last time I looked. Not only can you choose to have numbers place on the map tags for each household, but you also have the option to show the household (or group when multiple households are at one address) name on the tag. For the wards I looked at, the tags were a bit crowded and overlapped, but this feature has promise. There are also options for including address, phone numbers or email addresses on the directory page of the printout.

So you might want to try looking at some other wards in your stake. If you're lucky, you'll find at least one ward that works. Then you can become familiar with the features in anticipation of when the software problem is fixed. I have reported the problem using the Feedback link, by the way.

takahashi wrote:The stake president wants a map showing all the members in three wards. Looks like they are going to be rearranging ward boundaries. Any suggestions on how to do this?

Our stake did the same thing a couple of years ago, and my son-in-law was given the job of doing the computer renderings. He was very disappointed with the Churches mapping program, so he wrote one himself that was much easier to use and more efficient. There is always that option.

Alan_Brown wrote:I did a bit more research and discovered that the print-friendly page is not completely out of commission. Our stake has 7 wards plus the stake map; of those 8 units, 6 consistently give the server-side error, but 2 consistently work.

So you might want to try looking at some other wards in your stake. If you're lucky, you'll find at least one ward that works. Then you can become familiar with the features in anticipation of when the software problem is fixed. I have reported the problem using the Feedback link, by the way.

Stuck out on all 9 wards in my stake. God willing, the print friendly option will be back in operation soon.

Nice features! Most of my families have unverified addresses even though it looks like they are in the right spot. Is there a way to 'verify' the addresses?

RWoodmansee wrote:Nice features! Most of my families have unverified addresses even though it looks like they are in the right spot. Is there a way to 'verify' the addresses?

Bishops, councilors, ward clerks, assistant clerks and executive secretaries can verify the addresses. See here for more details.

Also members can verify their own address. This will show up as member verified.

ryan jones wrote:Also members can verify their own address. This will show up as member verified.

Is that the case now? It wasn't a few months ago.

JTaber wrote:Is that the case now? It wasn't a few months ago.

Yes, it was changed in some version. I know our ward clerk, before he was called a couple of months ago, was able to verify his own address.

In principle, I'm not sure this democratization is a great idea. Units might be trying to adopt consistent procedures, such as where to map the marker precisely on each residence, and how to group some addresses together. That would be harder to manage if everyone moves their own markers around.

Perhaps instead of just "verfied" it should say
"user-verified" or "leader-verified" or even "verfied by [username]"
Would help us determine which addresses are following whose
standards.

- Atticus

Has anyone successfully exported the data to use with a gps or spreadsheet? The output includes name and latitude/longitude coordinates. These can be used to create a .kml file for use in google earth (where the name label can be shown on the map) or a .gpx file for use on a gps unit. I suppose it could also be used in an application like ArcGIS to get really fancy.

When I try the export, I only get the first household. I haven't found any way to select all households for export.

idjeeper wrote:Has anyone successfully exported the data to use with a gps or spreadsheet? The output includes name and latitude/longitude coordinates. These can be used to create a .kml file for use in google earth (where the name label can be shown on the map) or a .gpx file for use on a gps unit. I suppose it could also be used in an application like ArcGIS to get really fancy.

The issue with export files being truncated has been discussed over on another thread: GEO Codes and Boundary Realignment. There you will see that it's rather hit and miss -- a few units can export successfully, but most seem to truncate the list.

idjeeper wrote:When I try the export, I only get the first household. I haven't found any way to select all households for export.

I'm sure it's no comfort, but you are the new leader in the race to export the fewest households -- you can only export 1, and the previous low was 8. Congratulations!

Alan_Brown wrote: I'm sure it's no comfort, but you are the new leader in the race to export the fewest households -- you can only export 1, and the previous low was 8. Congratulations!

No, I claim that title. My export retrieves headers only with 0 records.

boomerbubba wrote:No, I claim that title. My export retrieves headers only with 0 records.

It seems to be a problem with our ward, not boomerbubba's access rights. I'm his ward clerk, and I can only export the headings, too.

subtlecoolness wrote:It seems to be a problem with our ward, not boomerbubba's access rights. I'm his ward clerk, and I can only export the headings, too.

Right. It doesn't matter who is doing the export; a particular ward or stake seems to currently export the exact same list for everyone who does the export. The results vary widely from unit to unit, but are consistent for a unit.

Alan_Brown wrote: I'm sure it's no comfort, but you are the new leader in the race to export the fewest households -- you can only export 1, and the previous low was 8. Congratulations!

boomerbubba wrote:No, I claim that title. My export retrieves headers only with 0 records.

Just my luck. Finally take the lead in something, only to lose it minutes later. It's not fair, I tell ya! What a life! Guess I'll eat some worms!

It's a really cool feature. Hope they can get it working at some point.

Alan_Brown wrote:Right. It doesn't matter who is doing the export; a particular ward or stake seems to currently export the exact same list for everyone who does the export. The results vary widely from unit to unit, but are consistent for a unit.

The developers must be scratching their heads over this one. I wonder if it has something to do with the check digit in the unit number? (Just kidding. I would be clueless.)

idjeeper wrote:Just my luck. Finally take the lead in something, only to lose it minutes later. It's not fair, I tell ya! What a life! Guess I'll eat some worms!

Eat the sugary, gummy type. I find they work best for worm eating demonstrations.

lajackson wrote:The developers must be scratching their heads over this one. I wonder if it has something to do with the check digit in the unit number? (Just kidding. I would be clueless.)

I'm guessing it's a quirk in the membership records that kills the process. It's common enough that most units have it, but how much you see depends on how far down the alphabet that member's record is. I know if I were tasked to fix it, I'd be looking at the last member listed and the first one missed for any clues.

The more I play with it, the more I am convinced that the server is choking on specific members. In the case of our ward, the member that comes first alphabetically is one that the server chokes on, so we get nothing but headers in our export.

However, if I change the filter to exclude that first member, I start getting actual data in the export file. I still don't get everything I want, so I'm sure whatever the problem is, it applies to more than one member.

The next time I am at the meetinghouse I plan to make an insignificant change to this member's address, then change it back, in the hopes that it might shake something up and things will start working.

Also, when I click that member's name, I get redirected to a "Server Error" page and I am told, "Sorry, an error occurred processing this page".

subtlecoolness wrote:The more I play with it, the more I am convinced that the server is choking on specific members. In the case of our ward, the member that comes first alphabetically is one that the server chokes on, so we get nothing but headers in our export.
...
Also, when I click that member's name, I get redirected to a "Server Error" page and I am told, "Sorry, an error occurred processing this page".

Yes, I can confirm that. Furthermore, when I do a stake export, the list truncates right before a certain household. When I do a ward export for that household's ward, the list truncates right before that same household. And selecting that household results in a server error. Those three facts are clearly more than a coincidence.

However, there is nothing obvious about this household that distinguishes it from preceding households that export just fine -- nothing about the number of members in the household, the membership record number, the address, or anything else that I examined. My guess is that it should be pretty easy to debug -- when I sent in feedback on this issue, I provided the ward and stake unit numbers, so a developer should be able to track it down rather quickly.

Alan_Brown wrote:However, there is nothing obvious about this household that distinguishes it from preceding households that export just fine

How about use of reserved characters in one of the fields?

RussellHltn wrote:How about use of reserved characters in one of the fields?

Nothing of that sort appears in that household's record. But I think at this point the conditions of the bug are sufficiently identified that the developers can easily track it down. I don't see much point in speculation, unless it could lead to a temporary workaround, which I really doubt.

Just for my 2-cents worth, I tried to export the data after Bishopric meeting on Wednesday evening. I did not verify line-by-line, but the dozen or so names I was looking for were all there, as well as the first and last names in our ward, alphabetically.

Looks like things are working well for the Elm Creek Ward in this instance.

Now, if I could just wrap my brain around what's going on with CUBS!!!:mad:

Dave Sudweeks
Ward Clerk

It looks like some bugs have been fixed. Members in groups are appearing on the map, and when I export, I get all households in the csv file. I'm happy!