Resource Metadata Correction proposals

Page 1 of 6 (105 items) 1 2 3 4 5 Next > ... Last »
This post has 104 Replies | 2 Followers

Posts 1791
Ken McGuire | Forum Activity | Posted: Wed, Nov 4 2009 7:04 PM

In the hope of getting consistent metadata, I submit the following -

The Nag Hammadi Library in English is the only English Language Ancient Manuscript.  All other English translations are Monographs.

The Ugaritic texts are not listed as Ancient Manuscripts

Foundation Documents of the Gospel Coalition is not a Journal

What determines the difference between Bible Notes and Bible Commentaries?  Related is what is a Study Bible, type wise.  Some are typed as each.

All the volumes of Evangelical Review of Theology should be the same type - in my opinion, they are Journals

I would lean toward Journal for Semeia as well.

Biographical Entries from Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature, A Dictionary of Women in Church History, and Handbook of Evangelical Theologians are all Dictionaries

Oxford Bible Commentary is a Commentary

Luther's Works Volume 10 is a Commentary

In general, the Monographs should be examined to see if they can be broken up into some more meaningful type descriptions.

 

 

The Gospel is not ... a "new law," on the contrary, ... a "new life." - William Julius Mann

L8 Anglican, Lutheran and Orthodox Silver, Reformed Starter, Academic Essentials

L7 Lutheran Gold, Anglican Bronze

Posts 2753
DominicM | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Nov 4 2009 8:32 PM

we will be corrected, but the person "fixin" this at logos is off with flu, we wish them a speedy recovery

Never Deprive Anyone of Hope.. It Might Be ALL They Have

Posts 9056
LogosEmployee

Kenneth McGuire:

In the hope of getting consistent metadata, I submit the following -

Thanks for this excellent summary! I've bookmarked it so that I can correct the problems once our metadata editing program is running properly. I also plan to fix the Opening Up series, disambiguate the KJVs, and the lang:English Bibles that aren't.

Any other resource metadata fix suggestions are welcome.

 

Posts 687
Jon | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Nov 4 2009 11:47 PM

Text of Earliest NT manuscripts should be ancient manuscripts, needs series tag

Targumic Fragments should be ancient manuscripts, needs series tag

Anti-nicene fathers/post-nice fathers: ancient manuscripts

Apostolic fathers: only lightfoot listed as ancient manuscript

All the glossaries - really dictionaries?

Church dogmatics - needs series tag

Studies in dogmatics - needs series tag

The bible and its story - needs series tag

Ancient Egyptian literature - needs series tag

There are 2 copies of Pilgrim's Progress for anyone with Platinum/Portfolio or who bought Bunyan collection ?difference

A History of the Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ - needs series tag

Kenneth McGuire:
In general, the Monographs should be examined to see if they can be broken up into some more meaningful type descriptions.

I think this is spot on as 'monograph' is essentially meaningless. I guess this is debatable but could categories like History, Theology, Christian living be 'types'?

Posts 687
Jon | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Nov 4 2009 11:56 PM

Good things come in small groups: language English

Introducing the Old Testament, Introducing the New Testament: language English

All the lexicons except Liddel IGEL have language English, but not Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic

 

Posts 308
Paul Meathrel | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 5 2009 12:01 AM

I think that the New Testament Studies Collection ought to have the series tag set as well. 

Posts 308
Paul Meathrel | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 5 2009 12:11 AM

Also the first Christian Primer: Matthew in the Bible Lessons International Collection doesn't have the series tag set. Neither do the other three non commentary titles in the same series You Can Understand the Bible Survey, Old Testament Survey and New Testament Survey.

Posts 26500
Forum MVP
Dave Hooton | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 5 2009 3:12 AM

Bradley Grainger:
Any other resource metadata fix suggestions are welcome.

This is one I posted a while back:

 

Resource Current Metadata  Proposed Metadata
KJV study bible type:Bible Notes type: bible commentary
Macarthur study bible type:Bible Notes type: bible commentary
New Manners and customs of the Bible type: bible commentary type:Monograph
Tanakh, the holy Scriptures lang:English;Hebrew lang:English
Life of christ: A study guide to the gospel type: bible commentary type:Monograph
Word Pictures in the NT type: bible commentary type:Monograph
Word Studies in the NT type: bible commentary type:Monograph
BHS morphologically Tagged Edition lang:English;Hebrew lang:Hebrew
Septuaginta morphologically Tagged Edition lang:English;Greek lang:Greek

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TDNTA is tagged with lang German + Novum Testamentum Graece is tagged as Latin!

Dave
===

Windows 10 & Android 8

Posts 1791
Ken McGuire | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 5 2009 5:30 AM

Jon Rumble:

Text of Earliest NT manuscripts should be ancient manuscripts, needs series tag

Targumic Fragments should be ancient manuscripts, needs series tag

Anti-nicene fathers/post-nice fathers: ancient manuscripts

Apostolic fathers: only lightfoot listed as ancient manuscript

What is an ancient manuscript?  From what has been categorized so far, I have taken this to mean "non biblical original language text".  By the way, for me the Holmes is listed as an ancient manuscript, but the Lake Greek is not.

I, for one want the Texts of the Earliest NT manuscripts to be listed as Greek Bibles, since that is what they are, no matter how fragmentary.  By extension, the Targums should be listed as Aramaic Bibles.  If they are taged as Bibles, then the bible comparison tool can be used with them, which can be useful.

The Gospel is not ... a "new law," on the contrary, ... a "new life." - William Julius Mann

L8 Anglican, Lutheran and Orthodox Silver, Reformed Starter, Academic Essentials

L7 Lutheran Gold, Anglican Bronze

Posts 687
Jon | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 5 2009 7:05 AM

Kenneth McGuire:
What is an ancient manuscript? 

You're right this is a fair question, I guess that explains why they're tagged as bibles then...

There's also problems all over the place with Publisher and Publish dates, there needs to be some consistency. So for example, if I sort my library by publisher, many of the publishers have slightly different permutations on their names. Of particular concern is that there are Logos, Logos Bible Software and 9 different permutations of Logos Research Systems Inc. Within these there are 100s of resources including many older resources where I would rather know who the original publisher was. The publication dates are also inconsistent, some have Logos as the publisher but the original publication date, others have Logos as the publisher and the date it was published by Logos.

As an example, if I open up a Pulpit Bible Commentary, the citation is for Logos... 2004; what I really want if I'm bothering to look there (or if I'm copying and pasting and need the citation) is the information available on the product page here http://www.logos.com/products/details/2077

Posts 8660
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Nov 6 2009 7:45 AM

Christian History Magazine is incorrectly tagged as a monograph, it should be type:Magazine.

Hmm Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 

Posts 41
Fr. Nicklaus Winker | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Nov 9 2009 10:54 PM

The Imitation of Christ is writen The imitation of Christ

Posts 3293
Whyndell Grizzard | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 11:29 AM

Can we please tag study bible with "study bibles or bibles-study" instead of commentaries!!!!

please, please, please, and any other non-commentary book.

Posts 2212
Damian McGrath | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 11:44 AM

Whyndell Grizzard:

Can we please tag study bible with "study bibles or bibles-study" instead of commentaries!!!!

please, please, please, and any other non-commentary book.

I seven-hundred and twenty-fourth that

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 12:11 PM

Jon Rumble:

There's also problems all over the place with Publisher and Publish dates, there needs to be some consistency. So for example, if I sort my library by publisher, many of the publishers have slightly different permutations on their names. Of particular concern is that there are Logos, Logos Bible Software and 9 different permutations of Logos Research Systems Inc. Within these there are 100s of resources including many older resources where I would rather know who the original publisher was. The publication dates are also inconsistent, some have Logos as the publisher but the original publication date, others have Logos as the publisher and the date it was published by Logos.

This was also a gripe I had about "Library" listings under Version 3. It can be expected with PBB authors not having uniformity, but several of my third party "official" Libronix resources did not match up with Logos conventions for "Library" listings.

Sometimes it would be nice to re-define not just types & collections but the title itself.

[Oh, as Damian says in his post just above this, I seven-hundred and twenty-fifth the motion.]

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 726
Chris Elford | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 3:53 PM

Matthew C Jones:

Jon Rumble:

There's also problems all over the place with Publisher and Publish dates, there needs to be some consistency. So for example, if I sort my library by publisher, many of the publishers have slightly different permutations on their names. Of particular concern is that there are Logos, Logos Bible Software and 9 different permutations of Logos Research Systems Inc. Within these there are 100s of resources including many older resources where I would rather know who the original publisher was. The publication dates are also inconsistent, some have Logos as the publisher but the original publication date, others have Logos as the publisher and the date it was published by Logos.

This was also a gripe I had about "Library" listings under Version 3. It can be expected with PBB authors not having uniformity, but several of my third party "official" Libronix resources did not match up with Logos conventions for "Library" listings.

Sometimes it would be nice to re-define not just types & collections but the title itself.

[Oh, as Damian says in his post just above this, I seven-hundred and twenty-fifth the motion.]

Matthew,

You can edit the title of a resource. There's a little pencil beside the title when you click on the resource info button on the top bar on your library pane. You can also edit the "short title" there. What you can't touch is the "Type" and "Authors."

Chris

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:55 PM

Chris Elford:

You can edit the title of a resource. There's a little pencil beside the title when you click on the resource info button on the top bar on your library pane. You can also edit the "short title" there. What you can't touch is the "Type" and "Authors."

I can edit titles in Version 3? 

Well, editing titles in version 4 will be nice.. Still, the authors and types are what I'd really make changes to.

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 656
Jeremy | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 7:08 PM

The Encyclopedia of Christianity is better suited as a dictionary Type.

Posts 9056
LogosEmployee

We've made a couple of changes to test the system: the Opening Up commentary series should now be associated (although I notice that two titles now contain a question mark... that looks like a bug), and "lang:English type:Bible" shouldn't return incorrect results. The parallel passages and lectionaries that were missing inserted text should also be fixed now.

Posts 5619
Todd Phillips | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 10 2009 8:45 PM

Bradley Grainger:

We've made a couple of changes to test the system: the Opening Up commentary series should now be associated (although I notice that two titles now contain a question mark... that looks like a bug), and "lang:English type:Bible" shouldn't return incorrect results. The parallel passages and lectionaries that were missing inserted text should also be fixed now.

Worked for me!

Wiki Links: Enabling Logging / Detailed Search Help - MacBook Pro (2014), ThinkPad E570

Page 1 of 6 (105 items) 1 2 3 4 5 Next > ... Last » | RSS