Page 9 of 22

Branch Maps

Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:24 am
by techgy
We have two branches in our stake.
According to policy the Branch Presidents maintain their individual membership records with their home wards and have an "out of unit" record created in their branches.

When they sign into the beta maps site, they can only see the people in their home ward and not the branch. Am I missing something here or is this something that was overlooked.

Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:59 pm
by slmsz20
homedat wrote:The stake capabilities are included in the product roadmap and will come later.


Good to here, I already see several boundaries we need to fix in my own Stake. The Stake side of a tool like this is making sure ward and stake boundaries are accurate.

I'd still like to see the clerk functions granted to the stake clerks at least, to make it easier for us to train ward clerks if the wards want to use this tool.

Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:04 pm
by slmsz20
Techgy wrote:We have two branches in our stake.
According to policy the Branch Presidents maintain their individual membership records with their home wards and have an "out of unit" record created in their branches.

When they sign into the beta maps site, they can only see the people in their home ward and not the branch. Am I missing something here or is this something that was overlooked.


Someone else would have to answer this, but this is probably the side effect of the out-of-unit system. I am a technology specialist for a student single stake and the biggest headache we have is all the leadership are out-of-unit. Can the branch president see the branch website if it exists? I know I have to add access to every out-of-unit member in the current ward/stake website before they can access their own wards.

A future project that would be nice is stream-lining how out-of-unit members are handled with leadership callings, the current system is a big headache.

Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:18 pm
by aebrown
JKELogan wrote:Can the branch president see the branch website if it exists? I know I have to add access to every out-of-unit member in the current ward/stake website before they can access their own wards.


When you ask if the branch president can see "the branch website", are you referring to the Local Unit Website (Stake and Ward Websites)? If so, that question has been answered in this post. But I suspect that's not what you mean, since you also mentioned that you have to "add access to every out-of-unit member in the current ward/stake website", which seems to indicate that you know all about adding Non-resident Members to LUWS.

Perhaps you are asking not about "the branch website" but rather the "map of the branch on beta-maps.lds.org". But that question was raised in the very post you quoted. I'm not sure why you would be asking the very same question you just quoted, so I guess I don't understand. If that is the question on your mind, then I don't know the answer. It is an open question, but my guess is that support for out-of-unit leaders has not yet been implemented. I hope it's on the product roadmap.

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:47 am
by techgy
Sorry,

I should have made myself a little clearer. The branch president can sign into the LUWS using his LDS account. When he does instead of going to his branch he first lands on his home ward instead of the branch. Obviously anyone who's a member of the stake can view any unit in the stake.

I have resolved this with the help of Alan, by creating a non-resident member in the administrator area of the stake web site. After creating the non-resident member information when the branch pres. signs in he is now sent directly to his branch site.

Boundary missing

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:52 pm
by zaneclark
I just checked my ward and the boundary line is missing. I know this is still in beta, so i am not too concerned but thought someone might like to know this....

zane

Couple of Questions

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:59 pm
by ammonihah
I am a ward clerk.

1. Why the need to move members to the actual location? If we are getting address data from the map provider such as google, why are they not accurate (sometimes seven or eight homes off) with lds maps but they are accurate using google maps?

2. We already have data in MLS that lets us know what homes are member or part memeber. Rather than a dot to mark a house, why not a M for members and a P for part members? If you like a dot you could put the letters in the dots.

3. When viewing maps in hybrid mode, it is very difficult to see the ward and temple icons because their colors blend in, expecailly for someone that is color blind. Maybe, again, a symbol in a color that has more contrast with the satelite views, with the letter T for temple and C for chapel.

What a great tool this will be!

Bob

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:29 pm
by RossEvans
Ammonihah wrote:1. Why the need to move members to the actual location? If we are getting address data from the map provider such as google, why are they not accurate (sometimes seven or eight homes off) with lds maps but they are accurate using google maps?


I have the same basic question.

But be aware that the issue of geocoding precision is not as simple as that. Even within Google's own services, the geocoded locations it provides through its API may not be the same locations used for Google's interactive website. This is most likely due to licensing restrictions. Google and Microsoft for the most part do not own the underlying geocoding data and services, but license them from map providers. And those providers want to maximize their revenue by selling such premium data services to enterprise users.

And just because the map is being displayed by Google or Microsoft APIs, that does not mean the geocoding was done by Google or Microsoft. I think the Church may be using multiple geocoders, and the decision of which provider to use is driven partly by business considerations. The providers tend to price their most accurate geocoding -- at the parcel or "rooftop" level -- highly. Also, that level of precision is not available for many areas. Since this is an early beta, it is possible that the final choice of geocoding providers is not finally resolved.

With all those caveats in mind, however, as an assistant clerk I share your desire to have as many points as possible geocoded automatically with such precision to reduce the burden of maintaining those points manually. I also doubt that clerks in general will be able to recognize the right locations just by visual inspection. So moving and "verifying" hundreds of points by eye will be a very big job. For the forseeable future, given the state of the art, there will be a large number of addresses that need to be located manually. But I hope everyone is not held to that lowest common denominator.

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:29 pm
by russellhltn
zaneclark wrote:I just checked my ward and the boundary line is missing.


Even when you do a "Zoom To" "Ward Boundary"?

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:33 pm
by russellhltn
boomerbubba wrote:The providers tend to price their most accurate geocoding -- at the parcel or "rooftop" level -- highly. Also, that level of precision is not available for many areas. Since this is an early beta, it is possible that the final choice of geocoding providers is not finally resolved.


I wonder if the church will be storing the locations. So that if you locate "123 Main #209", then the member moved out, and a year later a new member moves into "123 Main #190" if it will remember that point. Thus the church would be building it's own high precision database.