Another mapping program

Use this forum to discuss issues that are not found in any of the other clerk and stake technology specialist forums.
RossEvans
Senior Member
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

#51

Post by RossEvans »

Techgy wrote:One more thing....I've not edited in any way the CSV file that's exported from MLS.

Suggestions? Is a branch csv file different from a wards??

This is just a wild guess, since I don't know precisely how WardMap is parsing and importing the data.

But one thing to check is whether there is a "Preferred Name" field in Membership.csv. If the unit has "Use Full Names" selected under the MLS System Options at the time the export is taken, the "Preferred Name" column will be absent entirely and all the other columns will be offset by one position. Perhaps that happened here, and the only record that worked was one with the street address data in the "Street 2" column instead of the normal "Street 1" column.

I think "Use Preferred Names" is the MLS default, and most units probably use it.
User avatar
hpaulsen
Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Barstow, CA
Contact:

#52

Post by hpaulsen »

Techgy wrote:I'm having a similar problem with a Singles Branch. I've exported the membership.csv file and loaded it into WardMap (twice). Both times it counts the correct number of members - around 80, but every address except one is not mapped. During the mapping process 79 of the 80 addresses are noted as errors.
Does WardMap list the addresses in the right-hand list (when "View by address" is selected)? If so, does the first item under the address say "Address could not be accurately placed."?

I have recently been informed that WardMap has some problems with forward slashes in the address. It turns out to be a google issue, and I'm working with them on it. I haven't tested, but there may be problems with hyphens and other non-alphanumeric characters as well.
User avatar
hpaulsen
Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Barstow, CA
Contact:

#53

Post by hpaulsen »

boomerbubba wrote:But one thing to check is whether there is a "Preferred Name" field in Membership.csv. If the unit has "Use Full Names" selected under the MLS System Options at the time the export is taken, the "Preferred Name" column will be absent entirely and all the other columns will be offset by one position. Perhaps that happened here, and the only record that worked was one with the street address data in the "Street 2" column instead of the normal "Street 1" column.
It's true that WardMap expects the "Preferred Name" column to be present. I haven't tested it, but it should not affect the import of the remaining fields, as WardMap relies on the column names rather than the column cardinalities. (However it would affect the import of home teaching, visiting teaching, and organization data, as well as the display of names - which would probably be absent entirely in WardMap.)
techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

#54

Post by techgy »

HPaulsen wrote:Does WardMap list the addresses in the right-hand list (when "View by address" is selected)? If so, does the first item under the address say "Address could not be accurately placed."?

I have recently been informed that WardMap has some problems with forward slashes in the address. It turns out to be a google issue, and I'm working with them on it. I haven't tested, but there may be problems with hyphens and other non-alphanumeric characters as well.
The message "Address could not be accurately placed." is not there. All addresses are listed however they're all in parenthesis (xxxxxx). I would expect a few address errors, but the entire 80 member database is a bit unexpected.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

#55

Post by techgy »

boomerbubba wrote:This is just a wild guess, since I don't know precisely how WardMap is parsing and importing the data.

But one thing to check is whether there is a "Preferred Name" field in Membership.csv. If the unit has "Use Full Names" selected under the MLS System Options at the time the export is taken, the "Preferred Name" column will be absent entirely and all the other columns will be offset by one position. Perhaps that happened here, and the only record that worked was one with the street address data in the "Street 2" column instead of the normal "Street 1" column.

I think "Use Preferred Names" is the MLS default, and most units probably use it.
Both of the name fields are present and have names in them. The Street 2 column is empty. All addresses are in the "Street 1" column.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
User avatar
hpaulsen
Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Barstow, CA
Contact:

#56

Post by hpaulsen »

Techgy wrote:The message "Address could not be accurately placed." is not there. All addresses are listed however they're all in parenthesis (xxxxxx). I would expect a few address errors, but the entire 80 member database is a bit unexpected.
And what happens if you select one of the offending addresses, then click "Automatically Re-map" at the bottom-right?
techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

#57

Post by techgy »

I've tracked down the major problem with the membership.csv file not being mapped. It was related to the phone number fields, of which there are two. Both fields had additional text after the phone number; (Cell, Home, Work).

When I removed that text the load was successful. There are a number of address errors that still need to be corrected, but at least the majority of the database loaded.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
User avatar
hpaulsen
Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Barstow, CA
Contact:

#58

Post by hpaulsen »

Techgy wrote:I've tracked down the major problem with the membership.csv file not being mapped. It was related to the phone number fields, of which there are two. Both fields had additional text after the phone number; (Cell, Home, Work).
That should not be the case. I'm not doing any type checking on the phone number. Interestingly, I was apparently jumping to conclusions earlier - google's server was having problems and returning server errors for ALL flash-component geocoder requests for a time. They have since fixed the issue. It may have been coincidence that they had fixed the problem at the same time you ran this test. Please try again with the original, and see if it still has a problem.
techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

#59

Post by techgy »

HPaulsen wrote:That should not be the case. I'm not doing any type checking on the phone number. Interestingly, I was apparently jumping to conclusions earlier - google's server was having problems and returning server errors for ALL flash-component geocoder requests for a time. They have since fixed the issue. It may have been coincidence that they had fixed the problem at the same time you ran this test. Please try again with the original, and see if it still has a problem.
I'll give it another shot this afternoon after work and report back.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

#60

Post by techgy »

HPaulsen wrote:And what happens if you select one of the offending addresses, then click "Automatically Re-map" at the bottom-right?
I tried this with the original database and it didn't help. However, after I removed the phone number problem (extra text) and found that the majority of the csv file loaded, I tried that again with the few that were still not mapped during the load and it worked, except for two, which had obvious bad addresses.

I attempted 3 times while I was at the branch clerk's office and it didn't work. So I took a copy of the csv file with me so I could work on the problem at home and spend more time on it. When I arrived at home and made another attempt (about 15 minutes later), the problem still existed. It wasn't until I cleared the extra text from behind the phone numbers that it worked. Coincidence? Perhaps.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
Post Reply

Return to “General Clerk Discussions”