Questions about Atlases

Now that I have Carta, I've started playing around with atlases and have several questions:

1) Typing atlas in the library search brings up 34 resources that are either atlases and/or maps. The type of these atlases is not consistent. 15 of them are type:atlas and the rest are type:monograph

2) Prioritizing most of these resources is useless because almost all of them are indexed by page and not by headword/topic/place. Why are they not indexed by headword or something useful?

3). I may be missing something obvious, by why can't I tell what "type" a resource is in the information pane? And how in fact do I easily find out what type a resource is?

Thank you for helping!

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

Gregory Lawhorn

Now that I have Carta, I've started playing around with atlases and have several questions:

1) Typing atlas in the library search brings up 34 resources that are either atlases and/or maps. The type of these atlases is not consistent. 15 of them are type:atlas and the rest are type:monograph

Yes, unfortunately having "atlas" in the name doesn't mean that the resource is a true atlas. I have three monograph resources that come up under "atlas," including "The Official Military Atlas of the Civil War," and (oddly enough) Morris Proctor's Training Manual, volume 1.

2) Prioritizing most of these resources is useless because almost all of them are indexed by page and not by headword/topic/place. Why are they not indexed by headword or something useful?

We have no idea, John. It's a great question. I have only two atlas resources that are indexed by headwords; the rest are page indexed only, with one also indexed by bibliographic item (I have no idea what that means). We can only hope that more of the Carta resources get headword indexing in the future.

3). I may be missing something obvious, by why can't I tell what "type" a resource is in the information pane? And how in fact do I easily find out what type a resource is?

The sidebar in the Library has a Type header. When I search for atlas in my Library, the Type sidebar tells me that I have 13 atlas types, and 3 monograph types. If there are no search criteria (so that you see every item in your Library), the Type sidebar will show you every type of resource you own. If you right-click in the heading bar you can add columns to the Library, including a Type column. You can then sort by that column.

Hope this helps!

John Fidel

Now that I have Carta, I've started playing around with atlases and have several questions:

3). I may be missing something obvious, by why can't I tell what "type" a resource is in the information pane? And how in fact do I easily find out what type a resource is?

Thank you for helping!

Open the library to the Details View and you will see the columns show type. If you click on the column header it will sort your library by type:

I do not have the answers to your first two questions.

John Kaess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1134915#Comment_1134915

Thank you both for the help with having the library display the type. I've got that working, though i still think that the resource type should be shown in the information pane.

i'm anxiously hoping for a response from FL on why many resources are type:monograph instead of type:atlas, and even more importantly, why almost all of them are indexed by page and not headword. Even Carta, the newest atlas resource we've all been anticipating is indexed by page. The single most important reason for paying FL the high prices for resources has always been the tagging and indexing they apply to the resources. They seem to have not done this with atlases.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1134918#Comment_1134918

i still think that the resource type should be shown in the information pane.

You can add and vote for that suggestion at https://feedback.faithlife.com/

Rick Ausdahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1134918#Comment_1134918

Thank you both for the help with having the library display the type. I've got that working, though i still think that the resource type should be shown in the information pane.

i'm anxiously hoping for a response from FL on why many resources are type:monograph instead of type:atlas, and even more importantly, why almost all of them are indexed by page and not headword. Even Carta, the newest atlas resource we've all been anticipating is indexed by page. The single most important reason for paying FL the high prices for resources has always been the tagging and indexing they apply to the resources. They seem to have not done this with atlases.

I share your sentiment, John. I expect the tagging issue is simply one of volume/quantity and complexity. E.g. I can appreciate how much effort it would be to tag every location that occurs on every map, even if the locations on the maps (which I suspect are graphics/images) could be done as textual overlays on the maps. In most (if not all cases), I assume the locations shown on the maps are simply part of the graphic/image itself, with no way to distinguish a location name from any other part of the image.

While I wish maps could be better integrated for locating and referencing locations referred to in the Bible and other resources on the maps themselves (e.g. jump directly to a map from a location in the Bible), I'm glad we at least have the ability to open a resource like Carta's Sacred Bridge, then do a search on a location name to see all the places (hopefully) where the location is discussed in the resource, and get links to pages in the resource that have a map that includes the location in question.

Dave Hooton

3). I may be missing something obvious, by why can't I tell what "type" a resource is in the information pane? And how in fact do I easily find out what type a resource is?

It is present in the Information pane of both the resource and Library.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1134941#Comment_1134941

The single most important reason for paying FL the high prices for resources has always been the tagging and indexing they apply to the resources. They seem to have not done this with atlases.

I share your sentiment, John. I expect the tagging issue is simply one of volume/quantity and complexity. E.g. I can appreciate how much effort it would be to tag every location that occurs on every map, even if the locations on the maps (which I suspect are graphics/images) could be done as textual overlays on the maps. In most (if not all cases), I assume the locations shown on the maps are simply part of the graphic/image itself, with no way to distinguish a location name from any other part of the image.

The main reason for having an atlas is to locate (biblical) places, so the tagging by FL is dedicated to finding those places in a Media Search (I always use the Maps & Charts fields with a dedicated collection). You may be presented with several maps in the same resource, which is a reflection of the tagging performed. I note that tagging can also include the place name in the text.

If you look at this description from Carta's Jerusalem Atlas

you may get the perspective of the publisher. So you can use the search fields for Photos and Site Plans. Also Artifact Images, Art Images, and Architectural Images. For me, it is much better than a Basic Atlas search; where you have to deal with 149 results for Jerusalem.

But should they be indexed by Headword? The chapter headings reflect the purpose of the Atlas, so some do not reflect biblical terms (Carta) whilst many reflect biblical history/persons (Atlas, "Rose Then and Now", "Holman Bible Atlas"). Some have lists of people/places (pointing back to the text/maps), whilst a couple have a glossary of place names or architectural terms (which have been indexed). What are you expecting?

I would agree with better integration with place names in Bibles, but note that Factbook has snaffled that to some extent (via the Factbook visual filter), with a Key Article from a bible dictionary and a Media section.

Rick Ausdahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135371#Comment_1135371

The single most important reason for paying FL the high prices for resources has always been the tagging and indexing they apply to the resources. They seem to have not done this with atlases.

I share your sentiment, John. I expect the tagging issue is simply one of volume/quantity and complexity. E.g. I can appreciate how much effort it would be to tag every location that occurs on every map, even if the locations on the maps (which I suspect are graphics/images) could be done as textual overlays on the maps. In most (if not all cases), I assume the locations shown on the maps are simply part of the graphic/image itself, with no way to distinguish a location name from any other part of the image.

The main reason for having an atlas is to locate (biblical) places, so the tagging by FL is dedicated to finding those places in a Media Search (I always use the Maps & Charts fields with a dedicated collection). You may be presented with several maps in the same resource, which is a reflection of the tagging performed. I note that tagging can also include the place name in the text.

If you look at this description from Carta's Jerusalem Atlas

you may get the perspective of the publisher. So you can use the search fields for Photos and Site Plans. Also Artifact Images, Art Images, and Architectural Images. For me, it is much better than a Basic Atlas search; where you have to deal with 149 results for Jerusalem.

But should they be indexed by Headword? The chapter headings reflect the purpose of the Atlas, so some do not reflect biblical terms (Carta) whilst many reflect biblical history/persons (Atlas, "Rose Then and Now", "Holman Bible Atlas"). Some have lists of people/places (pointing back to the text/maps), whilst a couple have a glossary of place names or architectural terms (which have been indexed). What are you expecting?

I would agree with better integration with place names in Bibles, but note that Factbook has snaffled that to some extent (via the Factbook visual filter), with a Key Article from a bible dictionary and a Media section.

Here's an example of the hit and miss nature I experience when doing a media search using the maps and charts fields.

I know Carta's Sacred Bridge has several maps/charts showing "Zarethan". However, if I do a media search in all resources for "Zarethan" using the charts and maps fields, I don't get any hits for the Sacred Bridge, whether I search for Zarethan as a place, a topic, or even just a text string. The only Carta hits I get are in the Carta Bible Atlas. I don't get any hits in Zondervan's Atlas of the Bible either, though it contains a map with Zarethan.

In general, when doing searches in Logos, I'm never confident that the search method(s) I try are doing a good job of identifying the resources in my library that have the information I'm looking for and are presenting those resources in my search results.

I'm not putting all the fault on Logos--there are probably times I'm just not using the right search method/approach and/or the right search syntax. I don't know that I'll ever have the time to develop my search skill level in Logos to the point that I am really confident that my library has been well utilized in the results I get back. I've just learned to lower my expectations. Having said that, I'm still very thankful for Logos and wouldn't want to be without it.

John Kaess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135359#Comment_1135359

It is present in the Information pane of both the resource and Library.

David, You are mistaken. What you are pointing to in both your instances are tags for the resource. To verify this, do the exact same thing for any resource which is a monograph and notice that it does not indicate that it is a monograph anywhere in the information pane in the library of the resource.

The only way to ascertain the type of a resource is to add the column for type to the headings in the library.

I reiterate my position that this information as to the type of a resource should be a part of the information pane for every resource.

John Kaess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135437#Comment_1135437

In general, when doing searches in Logos, I'm never confident that the search method(s) I try are doing a good job of identifying the resources in my library that have the information I'm looking for and are presenting those resources in my search results.

This is exactly my frustration. I feel that Logos has done a poor job of making the maps in Atlases searchable and useable both by failing to index the atlases by anything other by page, and by making many of the resources which contain maps and atlases of the type monograph. The Atlas Tool works on only a very small number of resources, or at least it seems so to me. If I'm wrong, I'd love to see a better way of finding maps and atlases. Ideally by clicking on a location in a Bible. In fact, having Atlases tagged to scripture pericopes would be an outstanding feature since in many cases there are journeys being mentioned in a pericope that simply cry out for being shown in a map/atlas.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135439#Comment_1135439

It is present in the Information pane of both the resource and Library.

David, You are mistaken. What you are pointing to in both your instances are tags for the resource. To verify this, do the exact same thing for any resource which is a monograph and notice that it does not indicate that it is a monograph anywhere in the information pane in the library of the resource.

Actually, it's more complicated than that. Dave is pointing to the Type indicator, not a tag... it's just that no Type indicators are shown if the book is Type:Monograph. I haven't checked all of the other types, but having checked a number of them, it would appear that the Monograph type is the only one not shown. Therefore, if no type is shown, it is Type:Monograph.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135439#Comment_1135439

it does not indicate that it is a monograph anywhere in the information pane in the library of the resource.

The only way to ascertain the type of a resource is to add the column for type to the headings in the library.

I reiterate my position that this information as to the type of a resource should be a part of the information pane for every resource.

but this doesn't help you at all regarding the functionality of the resource - types are a convenient way to approximate that, and to organize the library, but what really drives the functionality are the indexes and search fields. Those are (now) part of the resource information.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135470#Comment_1135470

no Type indicators are shown if the book is Type:Monograph. I haven't checked all of the other types, but having checked a number of them, it would appear that the Monograph type is the only one not shown. Therefore, if no type is shown, it is Type:Monograph.

Confirm. Interestingly, the type indicator for bibles also includes the language (like "English Bible", "German Bible", "Hebrew Bible")

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135441#Comment_1135441

In general, when doing searches in Logos, I'm never confident that the search method(s) I try are doing a good job of identifying the resources in my library that have the information I'm looking for and are presenting those resources in my search results.

This is exactly my frustration. I feel that Logos has done a poor job of making the maps in Atlases searchable and useable both by failing to index the atlases by anything other by page, and by making many of the resources which contain maps and atlases of the type monograph. The Atlas Tool works on only a very small number of resources, or at least it seems so to me. If I'm wrong, I'd love to see a better way of finding maps and atlases. Ideally by clicking on a location in a Bible. In fact, having Atlases tagged to scripture pericopes would be an outstanding feature since in many cases there are journeys being mentioned in a pericope that simply cry out for being shown in a map/atlas.

I can understand missed/incomplete tags for place names when present on a map. But I've been trying to find what you need to be indexed. This means you get a Find box to lookup an entry in the book (as with a lexicon or encyclopedia) but what are you expecting to find e.g. person, place, biblical era, bible journey.

In fact, having Atlases tagged to scripture pericopes would be an outstanding feature since in many cases there are journeys being mentioned in a pericope that simply cry out for being shown in a map/atlas.

I did a Media Search for <Gen 1-11> in All Media and got results in a number of atlases e.g. Abram travels to Canaan (Genesis 12) in "Crossway Bible Atlas"; where <Gen 21> or Beersheba found a photo of The site of Beersheba (Gen 21:22-34). A specific search for Maps of Beersheba found a map titled David’s Census, c. 975 B.C. (2 Samuel 24:1–17; 1 Chronicles 21:1–7). A search for <2 Samuel 24> found another unrelated map where the reference was in the text. This illustrates the tagging related to this atlas.

The same map can be found in "ESV Study Bible" when searching for <1 Chronicles 21>, where the reference is in the text of 2 Sam 24:10 (the Study Bible is indexed on Bible datatype).

This shows the variety of tagging, but it isn't true of every atlas. And this is not indexing.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1135487#Comment_1135487

what really drives the functionality are the indexes and search fields.

What fun it is to discover a Type:Sermons resource lacking sermon tagging... or a resource that consists of a sermon and has sermon tagging but is Type:Monograph. (Yes, both have happened to me lately, and they've been reported.)