No calendar conflicts when selecting a room

Is anyone else encountering an issue where no conflict message occurs after selecting specific room(s) and the event is scheduled?

I do get a conflict message when I select "Schedule entire location" checkbox. I have selected the rooms that would conflict but the event is successfully created. I first thought it was due to rooms that I added to the location but that does not seem to be the issue.

kmertlich wrote:Is anyone else encountering an issue where no conflict message occurs after selecting specific room(s) and the event is scheduled?

It's working fine for me. I get conflicts when I am supposed to, and none when I should not.

The things I would look for in your situation is to make sure that there are no duplicate locations, and I would look closely at the conflict message given when I try to schedule the entire location. Finally, there were some changes in the last update related to Young Men Room and Young Women Room; I wouldn't be entirely surprised if there were issues related to one of those rooms.

aebrown wrote:It's working fine for me. I get conflicts when I am supposed to, and none when I should not.

The things I would look for in your situation is to make sure that there are no duplicate locations, and I would look closely at the conflict message given when I try to schedule the entire location. Finally, there were some changes in the last update related to Young Men Room and Young Women Room; I wouldn't be entirely surprised if there were issues related to one of those rooms.

No duplicates found. Conflict message when entire message shows the three test events it is conflicting with that have the Chapel defined. When creating a new event that has just the Chapel defined for the entire day - I do not get a conflict message and expect one. I will continue to explore this tomorrow with some other members in our stake. Testing with my wifes account. She is defined as an editor of a private stake primary calendar. Not sure if that is a variable to be considered.

After hours of testing I believe I have found the issue.

The problem is when the stake is defined as the unit reserving the location. No conflict message is reported when selecting rooms individually. Conflicts are found if the entire locaton is defined.
Final test – I changed the Reservation from “Layton Utah Northridge Stake” to “Blocked - …”
Created a new conflicting event. PASSED – conflict message when selecting individual rooms as well as the entire location.

Take a look at the attachement. In the past, we have reserved locations at the stake level allowing only the building schedulers and stake administrators to manage events. As we transition into using the calendar we will open it up to other editors. Are we still going to be able to do manage it a the stake level?

kmertlich wrote:The problem is when the stake is defined as the unit reserving the location. No conflict message is reported when selecting rooms individually. Conflicts are found if the entire locaton is defined.

It's a little hard to tell exactly what is going on, but I wonder if you're seeing the bug I analyzed in this post. If so, the fact that you are a building scheduler is a necessary factor, and so the problem may not be as widespread as you may think. Try asking someone who is not a building scheduler (but who is a stake calendar editor or administrator) to try the same thing. If it works properly for them, then you are most likely seeing that bug because you are a building scheduler, and so most people won't have the problem.

aebrown wrote:It's a little hard to tell exactly what is going on, but I wonder if you're seeing the bug I analyzed in this post. If so, the fact that you are a building scheduler is a necessary factor, and so the problem may not be as widespread as you may think. Try asking someone who is not a building scheduler (but who is a stake calendar editor or administrator) to try the same thing. If it works properly for them, then you are most likely seeing that bug because you are a building scheduler, and so most people won't have the problem.

I am a stake clerk who in the process of settting things up have also defined myself as a building scheduler. I have tested it with three different member accounts 1)Stake Clerk/Building scheduler, 2)Stake Primary 1st Counselor with edit rights to one stake calendar, and 3)Ward member with edit rights to one stake calendar. All three get the same results. And as I think about it last week I spoke to a ward execultive secretary who was having what may have been the same problem but I haven't had a chance to investigate.

Now that I have change the reservation to Blocked... will only those that are defined as building schedulers be able to create/modify the calendar?

kmertlich wrote:I am a stake clerk who in the process of settting things up have also defined myself as a building scheduler. I have tested it with three different member accounts 1)Stake Clerk/Building scheduler, 2)Stake Primary 1st Counselor with edit rights to one stake calendar, and 3)Ward member with edit rights to one stake calendar. All three get the same results. And as I think about it last week I spoke to a ward execultive secretary who was having what may have been the same problem but I haven't had a chance to investigate.

Since you said earlier that you had created a reservation with the stake as the assigned unit, it is perfectly understandable that any of these people (all of whom have rights to edit at least one stake calendar) can create an event that overrides a reservation. That's exactly what a reservation for the stake unit is supposed to do -- it denies anyone who is not a stake editor of some sort the ability to use the reserved location/room(s) at the specified date/time. But it does allow any stake editor to create an event on top of the reserved location/room(s).

If that previous statement sounds strange to you, then I would recommend that you thoroughly read the Making reservations help topic.

kmertlich wrote:Now that I have change the reservation to Blocked... will only those that are defined as building schedulers be able to create/modify the calendar?

I'm not sure what you mean by "create/modify the calendar", so I'll just make a true statement that seems to be in the area of your question:

A Blocked reservation for a particular location (or rooms within the location) on a particular date at a particular time means that only a building scheduler (no one else, not even an administrator) can schedule an event that uses that location (or those rooms within the location) on any date/time that overlaps the reserved date/time.

aebrown wrote: A Blocked reservation for a particular location (or rooms within the location) on a particular date at a particular time means that only a building scheduler (no one else, not even an administrator) can schedule an event that uses that location (or those rooms within the location) on any date/time that overlaps the reserved date/time.

That is what I was looking for. I am trying to make it so that only stake administrators can schedule calendar events with a location/room defined. That is why the reservation was set at the stake level for the entire day. But it appears that I can't because of the risk of double booking. I will explore this more tomorrow. Thanks for your help.

kmertlich wrote:That is what I was looking for. I am trying to make it so that only stake administrators can schedule calendar events with a location/room defined. That is why the reservation was set at the stake level for the entire day.

There is no way to restrict event scheduling to only stake administrators per se; all stake calendar editors (which includes stake administrators) can create events on top of a Reservation that reserves a location/room for the stake unit.

On the other hand, a Blocked Reservation will allow only a building scheduler for that location to schedule on top of that Reservation; even stake administrators will be unable to schedule events for that location/room at that time.

kmertlich wrote:But it appears that I can't because of the risk of double booking.

The only bug I know of in this area is the one I linked to earlier, and it applies only to building schedulers. Other than that rather obscure scenario, I know of no risk of double booking when the system is used properly.

For the issue you are discussing in this thread, I'm not sure what the actual reservations and events are. Could you please lay out in simple terms the scenario, describing the reservations and events involved and the people (by role) who are taking the actions? I'm looking for something like (this is all only hypothetical data to illustrate reporting detail):

• Reservation: On 1 Nov 2011 there is a reservation for the Cultural Hall of Building A, all day, assigned to the Stake unit.
• Event: On 1 Nov 2011, there is an event on a stake public calendar that books the Cultural Hall of Building A from 6:00pm to 9:00pm. This was added by a stake admin who is also a building scheduler.
• Event: A stake calendar editor (who is not a stake admin or building scheduler) tries to add an event that books the Cultural Hall of Building A on 1 Nov 2011 from 7:00pm to 9:00pm. This event is added successfully, but I expected that the system would report a conflict and refuse to save.

I've done a bit more research, and here's my analysis of what you are seeing. Please let me know if this sounds correct.

• The "problem" reported in this post sounds like correct behavior. The details are a bit sketchy, but it sounds to me like there was a Reservation in place assigned to the stake unit, but no conflicting Event. When a stake calendar editor scheduled an event on top of the reservation, you expected there to be a conflict, but the calendar system correctly reported no conflict. Those stake calendar editors have the right to schedule an event on top of a Reservation assigned to the stake unit. Had there been a conflicting Event (not Reservation), a conflict would have been reported for them (but not necessarily for a building scheduler -- read on).
• The problem you reported in this post sounds exactly like the bug I reported in this post. That bug will indeed allow a building scheduler to schedule particular rooms on top of an existing event when it is also on top of a reservation, but if the second event is for the entire location, a hard conflict is correctly reported.

Do those two points capture the situation you are seeing?

aebrown wrote:I've done a bit more research, and here's my analysis of what you are seeing. Please let me know if this sounds correct.

• ... stake calendar editors have the right to schedule an event on top of a Reservation assigned to the stake unit.

I was not aware of this. I figured they would also need to be administrators. So I can't limit it to just administrators? Maybe I am looking at this the wrong way. It is giving me brain cramps.

aebrown wrote: Had there been a conflicting Event (not Reservation), a conflict would have been reported for them

This is not what I found. Here are my findings. Take a look at this new attachment.
All other unit reservations work as expected. I continue to have problems when defining the stake

• Reserved the unit “Layton Utah Northridge Stake” for the entire day 16 Dec 2011.
• Event scheduled from 7 to 8 am in cultural hall, by member #1 who has rights to edit a stake calendar but is not an administrator. Expected = conflict message not allowing the event to be scheduled. Actual result = "You successfully saved ...". CORRECTION: AFTER READING AEBROWN’S COMMENT THIS IS THE CORRECT BEHAVIOR. I THOUGHT THEY REQUIRED ADMINISTRATOR RIGHTS.
• Member #1 then scheduled a second event in cultural hall from 3:15 to 10:15 am. Expected = conflict message with first scheduled event. Actual = “You successfully saved …”; No conflict.. double booked events.
• Member #2 scheduled event in cultural hall from 4 to 5 am. Expected = conflict message. Actual result = "You successfully saved ..."