nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

A Question About Clippings

(‾◡◝)

This may be one of those questions which results in a head slap once it is answered, but I have yet to figure it out. Here goes ...

When I am reading a book and want to capture, say, an apt quote, I open a new, blank Clipping and then right click on the highlighted quote in order to add it to the new Clipping. I then add a title, tag, and/or notes as needed. All well and good. But, why doesn't the book display some sort of visual clue (hyperlinked to the Clipping) to indicate that a Clipping was pulled from that location (sim to the yellow post-it icon for a Note)? Can't find anything in the menu items of the Clipping, neither is there anything under the Visual Filters for the book.

It just seems odd to me. Obviously, I could tag the Clipping(s) with bibliographic info and then search on that. But if I want to casually browse that book again sometime in the future, I would like to see any previous Clipping(s) without having to do a search.

Am I missing something?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

David Taylor, Jr.

You are using the wrong function. The Notes Tool is capable of what you are looking for.

Notes = Annotating the text hence they give markers.

Clippings = Creating a notecard which is why there are no markers.

(‾◡◝)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017511#Comment_1017511

You are using the wrong function.

David,

Thanks for your input, but FWIW, I think my use of Clippings, as described above, is exactly what it was designed for - Logos Help says, "A Clippings document stores brief excerpts from a resource in their entirety, and can be annotated like a Notes documents."

Regardless of what you perceive the function of Clippings to be, the question remains, Why doesn't a Clipping leave a visual/hyperlinked trace in the Resource from which it was taken? If one has a heavily excerpted resource (i.e., many Clippings), and goes back to it years later, wouldn't it be more expedient to directly see what was previously excerpted - without having to compare Clipping search results in one tab with the resource in another?

Dave Hooton

But, why doesn't the book display some sort of visual clue (hyperlinked to the Clipping) to indicate that a Clipping was pulled from that location (sim to the yellow post-it icon for a Note)?

It's working as intended. There was some discussion in the L8 Private Beta about incorporating Clippings into the Notes tool, but nothing firm.

David Taylor, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017530#Comment_1017530

Regardless of what you perceive the function of Clippings to be, the question remains, Why doesn't a Clipping leave a visual/hyperlinked trace in the Resource from which it was taken? If one has a heavily excerpted resource (i.e., many Clippings), and goes back to it years later, wouldn't it be more expedient to directly see what was previously excerpted - without having to compare Clipping search results in one tab with the resource in another?

It's not what I perceive the function to be, that is what the function is. To accomplish what you are wanting you would use a notes entry, not a clippings document and you would anchor selected text to the note then make your annotations and you will have an anchor flag in the resource.

Think of your resources as physical books.

Notes = marking up the actual text and annotating the actual text. (again think real physical book writing in the margins etc.)

Clippings = Index Note Cards. In a real physical book, you add notes to these as well but they don't show up in your book

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017573#Comment_1017573

In a real physical book, you add notes to these as well but they don't show up in your book

They do if you mark/highlight them in your book. And that's all JRS was asking.

Back to the OP: The only way to accomplish what you want doubles your work. You make the clipping, then you add a highlight. Unfortunately, there's no way to do both at once (you can get it down to three clicks). But at least you can make a specific highlight tool that is unique to your clippings, so you can see them easily.

David Taylor, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017597#Comment_1017597

They do if you mark/highlight them in your book. And that's all JRS was asking.

Which is not the same thing. That is annotating, which is what the notes tool is for.

Back to the OP: The only way to accomplish what you want doubles your work. You make the clipping, then you add a highlight. Unfortunately, there's no way to do both at once (you can get it down to three clicks). But at least you can make a specific highlight tool that is unique to your clippings, so you can see them easily.

You can eliminate the double work by selecting the text and adding a note via the selection. This essentially functions the same as a clipping as it places the whole text in the anchor section and displays a flag beside the anchored text.

David A Egolf

I almost always copy the text which resulted in the note into the note. It's really straightforward on my iPad. The added advantage is that the notes file is readable without opening the original resource.

(‾◡◝)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017608#Comment_1017608

Thank you for everyone's input.

Just for clarification, I have always thought of Clippings as essentially an electronic 3x5 card suitable for apt quotes, aphorisms, brief illustrations, etc. Although there was/is much overlap with Notes/Notebooks, they do function in a slightly different way.

As I see it [and I make no claims of infallibility], Notes/Notebooks tend to be more of a large catch-all for any verse/topic. IOW, they are useful for capturing all sorts of miscellaneous info on any topic - sort of an electronic shoebox, if you will. The point being, one can search for any particular Notebook topic, but from that point on, finding any particular Note may require some manual digging.

Clippings, on the other hand, tend to be a bit more focused or targeted. For example, if I am writing a book, my Notes file might have all sorts of far-ranging tidbits, quotes, articles, illustrations, cartoons, etc. dealing with the subject. But my Clippings file on the same subject would contain more focused info pertaining specifically to my research/book/chapter. And, I am able to comment on any particular Clipping by using its Note area (thereby keeping my comment(s) separate from the quote itself), plus each Clipping is easily searched via mytag: or my comments in the Notes area.

I hope that all made sense ... Notes = large shoebox with some search capability Clippings = more focused, more searchable

Regardless, What I gather from the comments above is (1) Clippings and the L8 Notes/Notebooks purposely remain separate, (2) the fact that Clippings do not place a visual/hyperlinked marker in the resource is by design and not an oversight and (3) if I do want a visual marker for the Clipping, I could highlight.

Again, thanks.

David Taylor, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017670#Comment_1017670

As I see it [and I make no claims of infallibility], Notes/Notebooks tend to be more of a large catch-all for any verse/topic. IOW, they are useful for capturing all sorts of miscellaneous info on any topic - sort of an electronic shoebox, if you will. The point being, one can search for any particular Notebook topic, but from that point on, finding any particular Note may require some manual digging.

Clippings, on the other hand, tend to be a bit more focused or targeted. For example, if I am writing a book, my Notes file might have all sorts of far-ranging tidbits, quotes, articles, illustrations, cartoons, etc. dealing with the subject. But my Clippings file on the same subject would contain more focused info pertaining specifically to my research/book/chapter. And, I am able to comment on any particular Clipping by using its Note area (thereby keeping my comment(s) separate from the quote itself), plus each Clipping is easily searched via mytag: or my comments in the Notes area.

I am confused by this analogy. How is a Clippings document more focused than notes? Can you help me flesh through that so I understand your meaning?

(‾◡◝)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017711#Comment_1017711

How is a Clippings document more focused than notes?

David,

I most certainly did not want to go into extra innings about Clippings v. Notes/Notebooks and, in fact, I'm not sure I can explain it much better than above. It's something we would do better to sit down together and play at on a computer. Nevertheless, let me take another [quick] swing at it.

I think the L8 Notes/Notebooks model works exceptionally well if all one is doing is commenting on biblical passages. Well-organized by book then by verse/passage, plus the Anchor points. Tags. Bravo.

I am not so convinced about that model, however, if one is trying to collect topical data from various resources. I believe the Notebook/Note schema needs some work (which may or may not be coming in future updates). For example, let say I want to set up a Notebook on a topic, say, Epistemology. Fine, easy-peasy, done. Now I want to collect some notes from various sources that reflect various definitions of epistemology. Okay, the first one I find is a rather long paragraph from a journal - I select the text I want, I right click on it and select 'put it into a Note'. Great. I have to change the title of course to 'Definitions'. Now I want to collect an epistemological gem from Bro. Swaggart, namely, "I know that I know that I know." I find it, select it, right click on it, and then click on 'put it in a Note'. It is inserted in the Epistemology Notebook - but as a separate Note from (and on the same level as) my Note category, 'Definitions'.* If I want it as a second entry in my Definitions Note, I must select the text, right click on it, select copy, and then paste it where I want in the Definitions Note. It has now been placed in the "Shoebox" (along with however many other definitions I might place there). Trying to find that gem just became a little bit harder. (BTW, did you notice that the current Notes truncates longer selections? Hopefully, that is on their future 'fix' list - I'm sure it must be)

I'll let you try the same example using Clippings and the 3x5 card model. It's no contest, in my opinion, for topical Notes from varied resources and is the reason why I used the term 'focused' or 'targeted' for Clippings.

I am so tired right now, I'm not even sure I'm making any sense - hope so.

------------

*If you say to me, "Just set up a Notebook entitled 'Epistemology, Definitions' and let the program insert all of your definitions as separate Notes, then I challenge you to think to the future and the utter mess you will have with exactly-how-many-gazillions of top level Notebooks ...

'Epistemology, Definitions, Pentecostal'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Reformed'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Anglican'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Dispy'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Reformed, Scottish'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Whatever'

'Epistemology, Definitions, And On and On and On'

Point being, if everything is a top level Notebook then what's the point?

David Taylor, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017835#Comment_1017835

How is a Clippings document more focused than notes?

David,

I most certainly did not want to go into extra innings about Clippings v. Notes/Notebooks and, in fact, I'm not sure I can explain it much better than above. It's something we would do better to sit down together and play at on a computer. Nevertheless, let me take another [quick] swing at it.

I think the L8 Notes/Notebooks model works exceptionally well if all one is doing is commenting on biblical passages. Well-organized by book then by verse/passage, plus the Anchor points. Tags. Bravo.

I am not so convinced about that model, however, if one is trying to collect topical data from various resources. I believe the Notebook/Note schema needs some work (which may or may not be coming in future updates). For example, let say I want to set up a Notebook on a topic, say, Epistemology. Fine, easy-peasy, done. Now I want to collect some notes from various sources that reflect various definitions of epistemology. Okay, the first one I find is a rather long paragraph from a journal - I select the text I want, I right click on it and select 'put it into a Note'. Great. I have to change the title of course to 'Definitions'. Now I want to collect an epistemological gem from Bro. Swaggart, namely, "I know that I know that I know." I find it, select it, right click on it, and then click on 'put it in a Note'. It is inserted in the Epistemology Notebook - but as a separate Note from (and on the same level as) my Note category, 'Definitions'.* If I want it as a second entry in my Definitions Note, I must select the text, right click on it, select copy, and then paste it where I want in the Definitions Note. It has now been placed in the "Shoebox" (along with however many other definitions I might place there). Trying to find that gem just became a little bit harder. (BTW, did you notice that the current Notes truncates longer selections? Hopefully, that is on their future 'fix' list - I'm sure it must be)

I'll let you try the same example using Clippings and the 3x5 card model. It's no contest, in my opinion, for topical Notes from varied resources and is the reason why I used the term 'focused' or 'targeted' for Clippings.

I am so tired right now, I'm not even sure I'm making any sense - hope so.

------------

*If you say to me, "Just set up a Notebook entitled 'Epistemology, Definitions' and let the program insert all of your definitions as separate Notes, then I challenge you to think to the future and the utter mess you will have with exactly-how-many-gazillions of top level Notebooks ...

'Epistemology, Definitions, Pentecostal'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Reformed'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Anglican'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Dispy'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Reformed, Scottish'

'Epistemology, Definitions, Whatever'

'Epistemology, Definitions, And On and On and On'

Point being, if everything is a top level Notebook then what's the point?

Ok now I understand what you are trying to do. Personally, I wouldn't use notebooks at all for what you are trying to do I would just use tags. HOWEVER, if you create one Top-Level Notebook "Epistemology" then tag Defintions, Reformed: Definitions, Whatever, etc etc, then you can quickly filter out notes for that topic and sub-topic as you can filter for multiple tags.

Yes, the anchor does get truncated which is unfortunate. However, You could copy/paste the text into the note itself. Eventually this will give a resource link like the clippings document and it will also add the flag you want.

For example, I'm doing a huge study on Baptism. So rather than having a notebook for the project I just use tags. All of the notes for that study get tagged "Baptism" Then they will get tagged paedobaptism credobaptism as appropriate and I can filter out which tags I want.

Hope that helps.

Reuben Helmuth

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017670#Comment_1017670

What I gather from the comments above is (1) Clippings and the L8 Notes/Notebooks purposely remain separate,

This is only partially true. The intention is to eventually bring Clippings into the notes tool.

My personal preference would be to have the "full anchor text" be searchable and exportable (essentially merging Note and Clippings).

David Taylor, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017898#Comment_1017898

What I gather from the comments above is (1) Clippings and the L8 Notes/Notebooks purposely remain separate,

This is only partially true. The intention is to eventually bring Clippings into the notes tool.

My personal preference would be to have the "full anchor text" be searchable and exportable (essentially merging Note and Clippings).

Agreed on the searchable anchor text.

Honestly, the only benefit (that I see) that Clippings has over notes at the moment is if you want to create a bibliography or export bibliography files from the selections.

(‾◡◝)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017900#Comment_1017900

This thread has morphed from my original question about Clippings into a discussion about the design of the new Notes. I am going to make this one final post and then I am D-U-N since I never intended to get into this discussion in the first place.

First, a true anecdote. Many years ago, I was asked to set up a new company within the company that I worked for. My secretary had the job of setting up a brand new filing system for that new company. On day one, as we discussed the filing system, I warned her to be very careful and think it through before she filed even the first scrap of paper. "Anybody can put documents into a file cabinet," I said, "But it takes a well-thought out system to be able to get those documents out of the cabinet expediently." And sure enough, some time down the road, I would ask for the LMNOP contract and she would come back several minutes later complaining that there was no LMNOP contract. "Of course there is! we've been doing business with LMNOP for months now - there is a contract in there somewhere." Whereupon, she would disappear for a day or so until it was finally found. As I feared, that filing system was a mess - and it only got was worse with every new scrap of paper that went into it.

Setting up a Notes program for Logos has the very same dangers. My personal opinion is that the new Notes basically dead ends into a shoebox - as I said before, I think it works well for commentary on the Scriptures but not so well for non-versified, topical notes.

If I were setting up the Notes system, I would blend aspects from both the current Notes and Clippings. It would be a multi-tiered system which would follow the File Cabinet - Drawer - Folder - Subfolder - Sheet model (or whatever analogy you choose).

File Cabinet =

Drawer = Epistemology (to use my example above)

Folder1 = Shoebox or, To Be Filed (call it what you will)

Folder2 = Definitions

Folder2a = Reformed --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Reformed sources (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder2b = Clark --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Clark (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder2c = Mormon --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Mormon sources (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder2d = Pentecostal --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Pentecostal sources (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder3 = Articles

and so on. Add Folders/subFolders/subsubFolders/subsubsubFolders to your heart's delight.

I should note that there is absolutely nothing wrong with having shoeboxes contained within a filing system - they act as a catchall for things that you may not yet know how to categorize. The danger is when they grow too large and become nothing more than a bloated dumping place. Ideally, someone should cull through the shoebox occasionally and say, for example, "Hey, we've got 13 different definitions of Epistemology in here - I'm going to pull them out and put them into a folder entitled, 'Definitions'.

Finally, if I were to wield the magic wand of Notes development at Logos, I would be sure that my multi-tiered Notes system is fully navigable by search queries and a visual tree located to the left of the notes (i.e., sim to Windows File Explorer).

q.e.d.

David Taylor, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017919#Comment_1017919

File Cabinet =

Drawer = Epistemology (to use my example above)

Folder1 = Shoebox or, To Be Filed (call it what you will)

Folder2 = Definitions

Folder2a = Reformed --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Reformed sources (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder2b = Clark --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Clark (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder2c = Mormon --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Mormon sources (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder2d = Pentecostal --> contains sheets/pages/3x5 cards/whatever of actual definitions from Pentecostal sources (one per sheet/page/3x5 with searchable annotations, tags, Anchor Points and biblio info)

Folder3 = Articles

and so on. Add Folders/subFolders/subsubFolders/subsubsubFolders to your heart's delight.

I guess my point was that this does exist with the combined use of Notebooks and Tags.

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017670#Comment_1017670

As I see it [and I make no claims of infallibility], Notes/Notebooks tend to be more of a large catch-all for any verse/topic. IOW, they are useful for capturing all sorts of miscellaneous info on any topic - sort of an electronic shoebox, if you will. The point being, one can search for any particular Notebook topic, but from that point on, finding any particular Note may require some manual digging.

Clippings, on the other hand, tend to be a bit more focused or targeted.

One of the early things learned in taxonomy is things can be classified by purpose or by function (i.e. 'why' or 'how'). I think the cleanest way to differentiate Clippings and Notes is by function: A "note" is a bit of information YOU created; a "clipping" is a bit of information the RESOURCE AUTHOR created.

Thus, you can put clippings into notes, but you can't put notes into clippings. And the focus differs...a clipping is focused on its source, where a note is focused on its association/content...demonstrated by what happens if you publish a note with no attribution (nothing) versus if you publish a clipping with no attribution (something bad).

SteveF

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1017919#Comment_1017919

Dear JRS

Thank you. I "feel-your-pain"

I, too, mostly use clippings for many of these same reasons.

The Bibliographic [close-to -the source] aspect is very helpful. As is the hyper-link [I always "copy-and-paste]

In addition [apologies to JRS]

AND [for similar reasons] until/unless Notes regains its ability to be intuitively/visuallyorganized with/by "Bible chapter-verse" capability it is basically usless to me based on how "my filing system" works.