BUG: BWS is missing considerable text

Martin Folley

I am pretty sure that I have not caused this ... I ran a BWS from the context menu in Acts 4:33, using the Lemma.

There are considerable blank entries. I can see the text in a pop-up windows when I hover of the resource link but not in the BWS window itself.

Moving the guide into a floating window and refreshing it does not have any effect ... it is the same resources that do not want to play nicely.

Logos Bible Software 6.7 Beta 1. 6.7.0.0007 running on El Capitan

Mark Barnes

Martin Folley said:

There are considerable blank entries. I can see the text in a pop-up windows when I hover of the resource link but not in the BWS window itself.

What you're seeing is expected behaviour.

It's caused because many, but not all of the lexicons have a hidden field that gives the gloss (English translation) for every word. If that field is present, Logos will use the information to display in the BWS and in other places.

Generally speaking, you'll find that your normal lexicons will have the field, but theological and specialist dictionaries won't. That's not always Logos' fault, either. If you look at DDD and TDNT, for example, there are no glosses given in the work, so Logos can't add its hidden fields. But sometimes it is a lack of tagging — for example, Louw-Nida does have glosses that could be tagged.

Martin Folley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/769457#Comment_769457

Thank you both for the replies ... but I do not see how this can be 'expected' behaviour. Whereas you both have extensive knowledge as  to what may be happening here, as a lay person it is a bug in the UI.

If there is no corresponding entry to the lemma (no useful text can be displayed) then I would not expect that resource to appear in this list ... I would expect the resource to be hidden. If I hover over the resources's hyperlink and see a passage/entry then I would expect to see that passage in the main panel. The subtleties of what entry is wrong enough not to appear in the panel yet correct enough to appear when hovering over the resource ... 

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/769459#Comment_769459

Martin Folley said:

Whereas you both have extensive knowledge as  to what may be happening here, as a lay person it is a bug in the UI.

But the UI can't return information that isn't there.

Martin Folley said:

If there is no corresponding entry to the lemma (no useful text can be displayed) then I would not expect that resource to appear in this list ... I would expect the resource to be hidden

It isn't that there is no corresponding entry for the lemma - if that were the case then the lexicon would not be included in the list of results - but either that the lexicon doesn't provide a gloss or the gloss has not been tagged.

Taking BDAG, for example, the first entry for your word is "potential for functioning in some way, power, might, strength, force, capability" with the words in italics being seen as "gloss" fields and returned in the UI. The rest of the information returned for BDAG is built up from other entries associated with that word

As Mark says TDNT doesn't have anything similar - it starts as shown below - and so there is no gloss entry to return

δρόμος → τρέχω.
δύναμαι, δυνατός, δυνατέω, ἀδύνατος, ἀδυνατέω, δύναμις, δυνάστης, δυναμόω, ἐνδυναμόω*

Words deriving from the stem δυνα- all have the basic meaning of “being able,” of “capacity” in virtue of an ability; in contrast to → ἰσχυ-, which stresses the factuality of the ability, the stress falls on being able. Thus far no convincing etymology has been discovered.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/769459#Comment_769459

Martin Folley said:

I do not see how this can be 'expected' behaviour

'Expected' behaviour means that the section is doing what it's been designed to do. (When I - or others - say that something is behaving as designed or as intended or expected, we're not necessarily saying that it's been designed well or couldn't be improved. But saying something could be improved is not the same as saying there's a bug.)

Martin Folley said:

If there is no corresponding entry to the lemma (no useful text can be displayed) then I would not expect that resource to appear in this list ... I would expect the resource to be hidden.

I think you may have been slightly confused by MJs comments (it's possible she may have misunderstood your original question). In case it wasn't clear, all the lexicons in the list have an entry for δύναμις. What Graham and I are saying is that they don't all have a gloss for δύναμις.

Your expectation is reasonable if the purpose of that section is to show the English gloss for your lexicons. However, I don't think that is the purpose of that section. I think the purpose of that section is to show you a link to all your lexicons, and to show the gloss where possible.

Personally, I would like Logos to add tagging so that glosses could be shown in more lexicons, but I certainly wouldn't want them to remove lexicons that don't have glosses. If they did that, I suspect you'd have hundreds of people saying "I prioritised TDNT, but it's not showing up in the Bible Word Study!".

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/769457#Comment_769457

Mark Barnes said:

But sometimes it is a lack of tagging — for example, Louw-Nida does have glosses that could be tagged.

Actually, it does appear there is a bug at work here, at least for Louw-Nida. When you run a BWS from Acts 4:33 it doesn't show a gloss for Louw-Nida, but when you type the lemma in directly, then it does. I'm going to report that as a separate bug, with screenshots, to make sure it doesn't get lost in this longer discussion.