Improving the Cross References section in the PG

Mark Barnes
Mark Barnes Member Posts: 15,432 ✭✭✭

There's been a lot of discussion recently regarding the cross references section of the passage guide, and it's been determined that this section is generated from Bibles that we own, and is probably limited to five specific Bibles. But there are some problems, I think in the way that those Bibles are chosen.

  1. One of the Bibles is TNIV, which hasn't been available for some time. The 2011 NIV has the same cross references, so I know that under the current implementation you need to choose between these versions, but isn't it time that the TNIV was replaced by the 2011 NIV in this section?
  2. The increasing number of Verbum users presumably means the PG is getting used more often on the apocryphal literature. But it seems that only one Bible (NABRE) is being used to supply cross references for apocryphal literature. The result is that many verses in that literature have no cross references at all. However, there are a number of Bibles in Logos that have the cross reference field for apocryphal books, in particular:
    1. Alford's Greek Testament (Text and Notes) has more than 3,500 cross references from the NT to apocryphal literature.
    2. The Uncanonical and Apocryphal Scriptures has 6,558 cross references from the apocrypha, including 1,936 to other apocryphal works.
    3. The Ecclesiastical or Deutero-Canonical Books of the Old Testament Commonly Called the Apocrypha has 2,237 cross references from the apocrypha, including 432 to other apocryphal works.
    4. Nova Vulgata Bibliorum Sacrorum Editio also has many cross references.

As this data is already in the resource, is it just a question of "flicking a switch" when compiling the resource to get this data into the passage guide? If so, then it would certainly be worth doing, and would significantly increase the usefulness of this section to those with an interest in that literature.

This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!

Comments