BUG: Random order of returns

Running a passage guide on the first Lamentation (Tenebrae is coming - of course I'm thinking Lamentations), one of my collections is the Early Church Fathers. However, the results are not in sequence by book which is the most efficient way of accessing the items listed.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Melissa Snyder

The order is by resource priority (user-defined and system-defined).

Bobby Terhune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115040#Comment_115040

Melissa,

Could you elaborate a little more on this. It would seem to me that reguardless of the priority, each resource should be grouped together. For instance all Ante-Nicene Vol II resources should be together, Volume VIII should not have slipped in between the two hits in Volume two.

Could you explain better how "system-defined" prioritization was programed to work?

Thanks!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115040#Comment_115040

The order is by resource priority (user-defined and system-defined).

Nice try, Melissa, but this time I'm not buying it. [:)] If you look closely, you will see that references to the same volume end up split up. If it is, in fact, the system priorities (this series is not in my priority list), then Logos needs to modify the sort sequence for series to keep the series in volume sequence. But isn't it time for you to go home, pick up a good book ...

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115057#Comment_115057

Melissa,

Could you elaborate a little more on this. It would seem to me that
reguardless of the priority, each resource should be grouped together.
For instance all Ante-Nicene Vol II resources should be together,
Volume VIII should not have slipped in between the two hits in Volume
two.

Could you explain better how "system-defined" prioritization was programed to work?

Thanks!

I'm
not Melissa, but the Collections section is like the Basic Search with
"Ranked" ordering. There is no option to change the ordering in the PG
Collections to order by "Book". The Ranked order ranks each section in
a resource separately (ignores the book as a whole), and puts the
highest ranked section at the top, and then the next highest ranked section (which could be from a different book), and so forth. The definition of a section depends on the book. It's usually a chapter or a chapter subsection, whereas in a dictionary, it's usually an entry.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115074#Comment_115074

but the Collections section is like the Basic Search with
"Ranked" ordering.

I consider that a flaw in design. I'll place it in the Suggestions category but doubt if I can add it to uservoice as I'm out of votes ... I'll see if there is something I can unvote.[:)]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115079#Comment_115079

I consider that a flaw in design. I'll place it in the Suggestions category but doubt if I can add it to uservoice as I'm out of votes ... I'll see if there is something I can unvote.

I might even unvote for the sake of commonsense[H]

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115253#Comment_115253

I'm not sure it's a flaw in the design - more a limitation. All it needs a setting to choose the sort method (rank, or by book) - although I suspect that a by book search could be fairly useless unless you were very careful to limit your collection.

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115255#Comment_115255

I'm not sure it's a flaw in the design - more a limitation. All it needs a setting to choose the sort method (rank, or by book) - although I suspect that a by book search could be fairly useless unless you were very careful to limit your collection.

I think what is lacking here is the snippet of text to let you know what each header points towards; the numbered chapters in MJ's example are rather opaque. (Yes, you can hover to see the text, but that takes a lot of time.) When viewing the ranked results in a basic search you can use the snippet to determine the helpfulness of the hit. Not so with collection searches in the Passage guide. Now, I'm not in favor of adding snippets into the guides because that would take up too much space. What I would like to see is the top hit in each book of that collection show with a link to "show all other hits in this resource" (like Google's "see more results from this page") which would launch a basic search panel which would have snippets displayed like normal.

Melissa Snyder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115073#Comment_115073

But isn't it time for you to go home, pick up a good book ...

TCBlack

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115379#Comment_115379

Melissa, it was a subtle hint based on the guess that it was quitting time for the day in your timezone and you might need a relaxing evening. [:)]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115074#Comment_115074

the Collections section is like the Basic Search with
"Ranked" ordering.

It gives the same order as a ranked Basic Search on the passage! The identification in PG could show the additional info (page #, section name) from Basic Search, but I would still spend a lot of time figuring the relevance of passage references that appear in footnotes. Whilst the Chapter IX results are on different pages I wonder if the relevance is determined by paragraph context!? Either way I would prefer to have them sorted by Book!