Cannot print ordinance cards for people/ordinances I have shared with the temple.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: This appeared recently, but I could not locate the thread. At that time, there was inconsistency in the way the temple icon was presented. Right now, the temple icon for the ordinances I have shared with the temple list are all dark blue, which indicates that the ordinance is In Progress.

Others will see the shared but not printed as a green icon, which means they can reserve, print, and perform the available vicarious ordinances for that person.

But I only see the dark green icon and have no option to select, print, and perform the available ordinances, unless I first unshare the shared ordinances. On the ordinance page of the person's profile, the print option is grayed out.

This needs to be addressed.

LegacyUser

JimGreene said: Tom, this is working as designed. Once you share them with the temple they are not yours anymore, unless you unshare them.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Ouch.

Seems extreme for the person who reserved them initially.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: In thing more about this, no one can share a name they pickup from the temple list. It is good for only 90 days (temples open) and then reverts to its place in the temple list.

When I share with the temple, yes, I can unshare the ordinances, but if I pull the name from the temple list, I should be treated the same as everyone else -- which means I cannot reshare the name to the temple, just like everyone else.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I think there is an unintended side effect for the person who initially reserved and shared the ordinances. The thinking that if I pull a name (reserve it), it should not matter who shared it. The "grab and go" fails in a major way in the case of the person who initially reserved the ordinances and then shared (actually, turned over) them to the temples.

LegacyUser

JimGreene said: Tom, I am not seeing what the issue is here, please help me understand. If I share a name with the temple I am saying, "I cannot do this, so here you take it." When I share it it turns blue for me, because I have the option to take it back if I change my mind, but it also means as long as it is blue and I have turned it over to the temple I cannot print it or re-share it. If I change my mind and want to do something else with it, I simply need to select it and unshare it, then it is mine again. If someone else grabs it, until the ordinance is done or until after 90-days I cannot unshare it. If a temple prints it, it is done, it is blue for everyone, all I can do as the original submitter is track the progress.  I am not seeing any scenario where there is a fail for the original sharer. Again, please give me a scenario.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Hey Tom,

This is exactly the way it always worked (ignoring the new layouts and icon colors). If you are the first to reserve a name, you can share it with the temple and you get to keep the "first reserved rights".

The only way for you to print that name is to unshare it from the temple which puts in back into your reserved records (which you can then print).

If you already have the "first reserved rights" (i.e., you have shared it with the temple), you cannot go around and then get the second "90 day reserve" on it that everyone else can. You can only back out of the shared state into your original "first reserved rights" state (which SHOULD have a longer reservation duration).

This is why people with a 90 day reserve CANNOT share it to the temple. Only those with the original "first reserved rights" can share to the temple. Basically, Since you already hold that "first reservation" status, nobody else can get it, and thus nobody else can "re-share" it to the temple

The interesting thing here that is a real benefit of this, is that as the "first reserved rights" holder, you get messages about the ordinance progress. Also, if someone else as requested and printed the ordinance, either directly from the ordinances tab or via Ordinances ready, and then lets the reservation time out, you can then go in and directly unshare that ordinance from the temple list (thus "taking it off the market") which pulls it back into your "first reserved rights" state where you can now print and take it to the temple.

Again, all this functionality is exactly the same as it was before the page layout and icon color changes were made.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Now that I think about it, you are correct. This is the way it was before.

But, once shared, everyone but the person who shared the ordinances can "reserve" (or "pull" or "grab") the ordinances, "print" the cards, and go to the temple with them. The only person who cannot do that is the person who initially reserved and then shared with the temple.

Since any ordinance in the temple list can be reserved and not subsequently share the ordinances under their name, it seems a little silly that the initial sharing user cannot do the same.

Because all the available ordinances have to be unshared at the same time, and I may only want to take one to the temple, that makes the other ordinances no longer available for anyone to pick up.

Furthermore, according to the article on Ordinances Ready, it supposedly pulls from the ordinances that I have shared.

There is a major disconnect here. Will Ordinances Ready actually pull from my shared list or not? And if it does, why cannot I also pull from that list without unsharing first?

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I just read the article (https://www.familysearch.org/help/hel...) and it states that Ordinances Ready will unshare the ordinance from my "Shared" list first before it makes it available for me to print it.

I guess at this point is if Ordinances Ready can do this, why can't my login do the same thing -- automatically unshare and allow me to select the specific ordinance I want to take to the temple.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Jim, the problem is this: Ordinances Ready automatically unshares a specific ordinance and then allows me to print it (see the https://www.familysearch.org/help/hel... article, the second place names are pulled from).

I cannot unshare just one ordinance. I have to unshare all of them. The design itself needs to be rethought.

There is no reason why, when I want to take a specific ordinance to the temple, that I cannot pull it, "print" the card, and go to the temple. If I could unshare just one of the available ordinances (which feature has not been finished and pushed to production) I would not be concerned.

But, the process of unsharing the ordinances:

1) Stop the rest of the ordinances from being available to the world.

2) When I have completed the printed ordinance and then share the rest of the ordinances, the remaining ordinances drop to the bottom of the list. Those ordinances do not revert to their original place in the temple list.

Consider the following two relatives, which ordinances I shared almost six years ago. I unshare the names (I cannot unshare just one ordinance) and print the Endowment for both people. If I share the names before I have completed the ordinance, the names do not revert to their place on the list, but end up at the bottom of the list.

Yes, the printed card is still valid, but if some other relative is not aware of what I have done (printed the endowment), they can "grab and go" with the names to the temple.

The result? A duplicated ordinance, something that we want to avoid.



So I have to wait until I have completed the ordinance before I share the names with the temple list. At that point, the SP for both end up at the bottom of the list, and have not reverted to their original place in the temple list.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: So what is the solution?

Allow me to select the ordinance I want to perform from my Shared list:

Have the system automatically (and temporarily) unshare the ordinances so I can select the one I want to print, just like Ordinances Ready.

Then revert the ones I have not selected to be printed back to their original place on the temple list.

Either that or put a very high priority on allowing the sharing and unsharing to be by ordinance and not by name.

Regardless, if the design remains the same -- even if I can select a specific ordinance to unshare, then selecting an ordinance to print and take to the temple should automatically unshare that ordinance, just like Ordinances Ready.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said:

it states that Ordinances Ready will unshare the ordinance from my "Shared" list first before it makes it available for me to print it.

And if it is a green, it will Request it for you before it makes it available for you to print it.

And if it is on someone else's shared list (another green icon), it will Request it for you before it makes it available for you to print it

It's all the same behavior.

The only difference is that you select to Unshare an item and then print it as opposed to selecting to Request an item and then print it. Basically the same number of steps.

And in my case, when I log in, I really don't want all of my current 300 items shared with the temple being unshared automatically. Then nobody else could get at them and I'd have to go through the process again re-sharing them all (except the one I wanted) with the temple.

The issue is that you ALREADY have the thing reserved. you've just put it into a sharing mode allowing someone to "take it away from you" via the temple queue. But until that happens, it is still yours to use how you will.

Now the issue of the ordinance's "stickiness" and having to reserve groups of them and the like, I've not looked at it closely. Hopefully the work that FS is doing on that now will resolve itself in a fashion compatible with all this other stuff we've talked about.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Jeff, Ordinances Ready unshares the ordinance from my Shared list (the second place in the article from which a name is pulled). It has nothing to do with unreserved or what others have shared.

What I am saying is that I should not have to unshare the name first before I print the card. The action should be the same as Ordinances Ready. The real problem is that after I've completed the ordinance and I share the rest of the ordinances, they go to the bottom of the list, and do not revert to their original position.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Tom, I can't really disagree with your point on the color. When the item is in the "shared with temple" mode (i.e., the one previously indicated with a red icon), if ANYONE including the person who shared it can request it, then it should be green and not "in progress". It's not in progress to you until it is taken out of your hands by someone else and you cannot retrieve it or do anything with it.

So setting those to green does make sense, and Unsharing before printing could be eliminated in the terminology, but you would still have to "Request" the item before printing which is identical in this case to unsharing it anyway.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Correct.

Right now, I have to first unshare the ordinances before I can print them. If I reserved them a long time ago (and I don't know if this is still true), my reservation will be past the two-year limit and no longer be in My Reservation list.

i need to check that on the beta site.

Interesting. Two things are happening on the beta site.

1) If ordinances were shared years ago, and unshared, the reserve date is automatically updated to the present date.

2) I can unshare individual ordinances, something that is not presently available in production.

I just checked production and it appears that I can now share and unshare individual ordinances. Also, if ordinances were shared a long time ago, when I unshared an ordinance, the reserved date is brought to the current.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Okay, I just did some checking on the beta site and verified the same is true in production:

1) Ordinances can individually be shared or unshared. This is new.

2) If the ordinance was originally shared years ago (as illustrated above), when unshared, the reserved date is brought current. This is also new.

The issue still remains, I have to unshare before I can print the card. That is an unnecessary step that still needs to be eliminated. The action may be as designed, but the thinking behind that particular design does not make sense.

If I have turned over the person to the temple, then I should not have to go through the process of unsharing it before I can take the name to the temple for the vicarious work.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: The only potential issues I see with your original idea that you should see people that you have shared with the temple as green is that you are basically merging the Unshare and Request functions. The end results of these two functions are not always the same. Especially in terms of reservation times and what happens when the reservation time expires. Having that line blurred even more might just cause further confusion.

Also, we've had folks that didn't like the idea that all of their "shared with temple" items would show up in the temple recommended tasks list on the landing page. By using the "Request" function to include any unshare operations, it would mandate that all of the shared with temple items that a person had would have to show up on their recommended tasks list.

At this time, to reduce confusion, I would suggest that it be left as is and then whenever a true "sharing" state is evoked to support additional "directed sharing" such as to family groups, etc., THEN that final merging of the "shared with temple" and "available for request" modes could happen.

LegacyUser

JimGreene said: Tom, in a word, the reason why the person who shared with the temple has to unshare it, duplication. Remember, when you shared it you gave it to them, the only reason we leave the blue icon for you is so you can follow it's progress, and possibly take it back. If all of the temple's printing of cards was real-time, and there was no delay or latency in the system anywhere in the world, then you taking it back by printing it would work just fine. But we cannot guarantee those conditions. So you have to unshare it first, so that we can check and make sure that the temple has not printed it. Remember the temple system is not FamilySearch, there is an interface between the two. Let's say that the same day you decide to take it back by printing it the temple also prints it. Now there are two cards for the same person and same ordinance. That is what we are trying to prevent. When you take it back you have to unshare it, then you have ownership again, it is off the temple list, and you can do whatever you'd like.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Okay, now that makes sense. The real-time issue would certainly be a problem,

But isn't that also a problem for Ordinances Ready?

What I'm saying is that the real-time issue would affect any feature that automatically unshares and reserves an ordinance, including Ordinances Ready.

The question is not me furthering the argument, but more for information, than anything else. Unless something else is going on in the background.

A related question: does the in process (dark blue icon) happen when a temple pulls ordinances, or only when the temple prints the ordinance, possibly several days after the temple has pulled the ordinances?

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: At this point, much of my protest is now immaterial, which happened because now we can unshare and share individual ordinances. We no longer have to unshare all of them and all is good.

LegacyUser

JimGreene said: Tom, to ordinances ready all shared reservations are green. When it finds a green temple, whether 2-year or 90-day, it can take it and give it to you, only having to check the temple list to verify it has not been printed on the 90-day ones.  For ordinances a patron has shared there is an ownership thread that turns it blue, and before it can be printed that ownership must be fully reclaimed, it must be green for the one who wants to print it. Could it be done in one step, yes of course it could, but it was much easier (less code) and less likely to fail, this way.
Your second question is kind of moot. It all happens at the same time. I am not familiar enough with the temple program, but having observed its use, it is when the temple asks for a new on-hand inventory of cards that it triggers the process.