General Question on Links

Are links to a specific product only? Or do they link to the best version the user has? I ask because I’ve been having trouble lately. For example, links to the Babylonian Talmud will not recognize this version: https://www.logos.com/product/10356/the-babylonian-talmud-original-text-edited-corrected-formulated-and-translated-into-english (effectively making this a useless resource)

Also, I’ve seen Orthodox works with links immediately jump to the Greek version of a text when I have the English translation of the same work. These quirks make some things rather inconvenient. Are there settings I can change? Or is this “just the way it is”?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

JT (alabama24)

Specific product.

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1055852#Comment_1055852

David--It sounds to me like you might be having issues with your prioritization.

For Babylonian Talmud references we use data types for them which means links should resolve to your highest prioritized resource that is indexed by Babylonian Talmud references.

Based upon the behavior you described for Orthodox works it sounds like something similar is happening there as well.

If you have questions about how to prioritize resources you can check out this wiki page: https://wiki.logos.com/Prioritizing

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

Are links to a specific product only?

Resource links are. These are the default links created by "Copy location as" on the panel menu.

Or do they link to the best version the user has?

A data type reference link will open the user's preferred resource for that reference. An example of such a link is https://ref.ly/logosref/BabTalmud.Shabb._1

There's not a built-in way to create these links; you would need to tweak the results of "Copy location as" until it works. Making it possible to copy this link with just one click is something we've discussed internally, but isn't yet part of Logos 8. Some more information can be found here: https://wiki.logos.com/Hyperlinks#The_Anatomy_of_a_Link

David Wanat

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1055860#Comment_1055860

David--It sounds to me like you might be having issues with your prioritization.

For Babylonian Talmud references we use data types for them which means links should resolve to your highest prioritized resource that is indexed by Babylonian Talmud references.

that’s the only version of the Babylonian Talmud I have, so I don’t know if that’s the issue. I will give it a try though

David Wanat

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1055915#Comment_1055915

Looking more closely at my Talmud, I see it’s not even numbered like the resources that cite it, probably explaining why it doesn’t work.

so, I sent an email requesting a refund as I certainly would not have bought it if I knew it wasn’t going to work in studying Jewish authors.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1055921#Comment_1055921

it’s not even numbered

The term is "versified." I misunderstood your original question. Your question was not about resource links (a link to a specific resource), but reference links to versified scripture. Part of what threw me is when you asked if the link would go to the "best" version. For example: If there were two versions of a book, the link, by its very nature, would link to only one of those... it would link to the specific resource referenced in the book. It would not link to both, nor would it link to the second if the first were not present. The reference is to a SPECIFIC resource edition, and so is the link.

David Wanat

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1055968#Comment_1055968

Ok, if you mean by versified a Talmud reference like BT Sanh. 99a, then yes, this version is not versified. I think FL needs to issue a disclaimer then.

Kyle G. Anderson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1055975#Comment_1055975

Ok, if you mean by versified a Talmud reference like BT Sanh. 99a, then yes, this version is not versified. I think FL needs to issue a disclaimer then.

OK. I think I understand you know where you are coming from.

There are two major forms of versification for the Babylonian Talmud. The most common follows a chapter verse scheme, e.g. B. Sanh. 4:3. Alternatively there is a folio schema, e.g. BT Sanh. 99a.

We support both. However the title you purchased only follows the chapter/verse schema and we indexed it as such. Since the source material doesn't identify folio indicators its not something we could add.

Any reference that uses the chapter/verse schema should resolve to your edition.

David Wanat

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056014#Comment_1056014

I suspected that was the case. You might want to put a warning on that resource, so people don’t buy it expecting it to work like other versions like I did.

Thanks.

Phil Quigley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056024#Comment_1056024

This may be slightly off-topic, but what happens when a resource is removed and replaced with a new edition? I'm thinking specifically of the Textual Criticism book in the Lexham Method series. I'm going through BI206 (New Testament Exegesis) and the links to this resource link to the resource that was pulled. The links should be updated to point to the revised edition. I've seen this resource linked in other places and in every one, they're all pointing to a non-existent resource.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056062#Comment_1056062

The links should be updated to point to the revised edition. I've seen this resource linked in other places and in every one, they're all pointing to a non-existent resource.

It isn’t that simple, and it isn’t a non existent resource. You just don’t own it, but other people do.

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056062#Comment_1056062

What the Mobile Ed team typically does is add links to the revised edition, so whether someone already owns the old or the new, they are set either way.

AS JT pointed out, merely updating old links to point to the new resource would have consequences for people who only own the old resource.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056093#Comment_1056093

What the Mobile Ed team typically does is add links to the revised edition, so whether someone already owns the old or the new, they are set either way.

I am unaware of this happening, but don't think that it is "typical" in any case. It is my understanding that if Book A references Book B1, the links will be to Book B1, not Book B2 or B3 or B4.

If Book A is updated to Book A2, and references Book B2, then that is the edition that will be linked, not Book B1!

If I am wrong on this, then I am unaware of anyone correcting this information in the many years I have been in the forums when this topic has come up.

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056124#Comment_1056124

JT, this is in regard to links from courseware to books, not links between books.

They can add course links to a newer edition of a book, so there are two courseware links, one to the old resource, and one to the new.