NET Bible & Pre-Pubs
Comments
-
Here is what it looks like in a regular resource
0 -
Beloved, thanks for sharing what you understand after to speaking to CS.Beloved Amodeo said:In discussions with CS regarding this issue what I could ferret out from them is that the publisher made the decision to release the resource the way we have it. We were not charged for a separate edition for the notes which as you know is not available. This was not communicated to us thus the confusion. On a cursory review there does not appear to be much difference in the newly released notes. But, I see no advantage in linking the first edition notes with the second edition, except maybe to proof the second edition.
In regard to your last sentence, while I'm not sure about any advantage in linking the 1st and 2nd edition notes, I am wondering if/how linking them would work? In MJ Smith's post on 2021-12-2, item 7 says "We did delete about 3300 footnotes which were deemed unnecessary and superfluous such as “δε has not been translated” or “και has not been translated due to differences in Greek and English style.”
Even if there was not a single new note in the 2nd edition, I assume dropping 3300 notes would change the note numbers assigned to at least some notes in the 2nd edition from what they were in the 1st edition.
Would linking not be affected in any way by changes in note numbers?
I'm also curious about how one would go about linking the "notes" built into the 2nd edition Bible, with the "notes" that were a separate resource for/with the 1st edition Bible. I can visualize manually comparing them by having the 2nd edition Bible in one panel and the 1st edition notes resource in a second panel, putting them in a link-set, then selecting a note from the 2nd edition Bible in a popup window so it could be compared to the note in the 1st edition notes resource. That's doable I guess if done once in a while, but probably not very effective on a large scale. Is there a better way?
0 -
Happy New Year! Rick. Your comment is just what I meant to convey. In action despite the extensive fn changes, I think one will be able to follow along nicely from one resource to the other (second ed. linked to the first ed. notes).Rick Ausdahl said:I can visualize manually comparing them by having the 2nd edition Bible in one panel and the 1st edition notes resource in a second panel, putting them in a link-set, then selecting a note from the 2nd edition Bible in a popup window so it could be compared to the note in the 1st edition notes resource.
I was unable to find an example of kai in the first edition to cp with the second ed. Which was evidence that the citation was dropped. All the instances I found were retained in the second ed notes.Rick Ausdahl said:"We did delete about 3300 footnotes which were deemed unnecessary and superfluous such as “δε has not been translated” or “και has not been translated due to differences in Greek and English style.”
Edit: I can also state the same for de. Which makes me wonder what I paid for!
Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.
International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.
MacBook Pro MacOS Sequoia 15.4 1TB SSD
0 -
If that's the case, you sure have a point when it comes to the notes. At the NET Bible web site Changes - NET Bible, they do list a lot of changes made to the Bible text itself, but a whole lot of those seem to be things as potentially unimportant as changing words that used to start with a lower case letter to start with an upper case letter. I haven't begun to look through them all yet though, so there might be some "meatier" changes. I thought though (I guess I should say I assummed) there was going to be more going on with changes in the notes themselves. And... I was expecting the notes to once again be in a separate resource. Guess I didn't research that very well. [:O]Beloved Amodeo said:
I was unable to find an example of kai in the first edition to cp with the second ed. Which was evidence that the citation was dropped. All the instances I found were retained in the second ed notes.Rick Ausdahl said:"We did delete about 3300 footnotes which were deemed unnecessary and superfluous such as “δε has not been translated” or “και has not been translated due to differences in Greek and English style.”
Edit: I can also state the same for de. Which makes me wonder what I paid for!
0 -
Mattillo said:Robert M. Warren said:Mattillo said:
ask that the NET 2 at least have its date corrected or cancelled.
Since many of us already own the 2nd Ed reverse interlinears, if they cancel the actual bible, won't that be like having sold us the transmission for an Edsel?
It is also included in several packages and feature sets so many of us have already paid for it and still not received it yet
Yes it is in Logos 9 Silver and above various Academic and bilingual packages. Maybe we will get it with Logos 10.
0 -
No! Rick, the fact that there is no separate notes edition was an unpleasant surprise to FL as well so we can blame two: FL for not bringing this to our attention when it became clear that there would be no separate edition and the publisher for not making this known from the git go. So, you see that no amount of research could have revealed this until the final hour. Not your fault!Rick Ausdahl said:I was expecting the notes to once again be in a separate resource. Guess I didn't research that very well.
Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.
International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.
MacBook Pro MacOS Sequoia 15.4 1TB SSD
0 -
Beloved Amodeo said:
Rick, the fact that there is no separate notes edition was an unpleasant surprise to FL as well.
It was the same for TheWord Bible Software, 2nd edition was released as a single module instead of a separate one. Not sure why they chose to do this. It basically makes using the 2nd edition impossible for me since I don't particularly care for the NET translation itself, but use the notes separately with the NKJV (or any other translation I'm reading in).
I also don't like that they removed note entries. I'm a paranoid person as it is. It just seems suspicious to me. But even if its not, I would rather have the extra notes included and I made the decision on whether or not they are relevant.
I also don't like that Logos updates bible translations periodically without the end user knowing what was changed. I've read that the bible text is never changed in these updates but how would I know? I guess this makes printed editions all the more important so when you come across something that seems off, you have a way to compare.
I personally will not be using the NET notes 2nd edition but will stick with the 1st edition and the separate module.
0 -
Beloved Amodeo said:
No! Rick, the fact that there is no separate notes edition was an unpleasant surprise to FL as well so we can blame two: FL for not bringing this to our attention when it became clear that there would be no separate edition and the publisher for not making this known from the git go. So, you see that no amount of research could have revealed this until the final hour. Not your fault!Rick Ausdahl said:I was expecting the notes to once again be in a separate resource. Guess I didn't research that very well.
That's interesting. I got burned on NJB, when they embedded the notes there. Got a refund. This round (NET-2), I took a pass. NET-1 is perfectly great.
0 -
DMB said:Beloved Amodeo said:
No! Rick, the fact that there is no separate notes edition was an unpleasant surprise to FL as well so we can blame two: FL for not bringing this to our attention when it became clear that there would be no separate edition and the publisher for not making this known from the git go. So, you see that no amount of research could have revealed this until the final hour. Not your fault!Rick Ausdahl said:I was expecting the notes to once again be in a separate resource. Guess I didn't research that very well.
That's interesting. I got burned on NJB, when they embedded the notes there. Got a refund. This round (NET-2), I took a pass. NET-1 is perfectly great.
Doesn't the NJB have a separate notes document?
https://www.logos.com/product/192228/the-new-jerusalem-bible-notes
0 -
Mattillo said:
Doesn't the NJB have a separate notes document?
https://www.logos.com/product/192228/the-new-jerusalem-bible-notes
Yes it does, or at least my version does. I have an NJB:Text and an NJB:Notes in my library
0 -
David Carter said:Mattillo said:
Doesn't the NJB have a separate notes document?
https://www.logos.com/product/192228/the-new-jerusalem-bible-notes
Yes it does, or at least my version does. I have an NJB:Text and an NJB:Notes in my library
True ... got my rationale wrong ... the NJB notes only worked with NJB (separate resource, yes). I was hoping to use them, as I do with NET-1 notes.
0 -
DMB said:
NET-1 is perfectly great.
There are two audio Bibles for the NET 2.1. Thomas Nelson is publishing some nice hardcopy Bibles. The translators sells an epub version that works beautifully on a large screen e-ink reader.
Some churches still use the KJV, and some people and some classes use opensource software that uses the KJV and Strong's as its base Bible; the NET 2.1 was designed to integrate with Strong's. For lower-income and foreign students, the NET 2.1 has greater potential to run in free software and on older and under-powered devices.
I am curious to see if the NET 2.1 is used in the special ways that it can be used, or if it will be just another translation that gets updated endlessly with older versions abandoned and pulled from the market.
0 -
Kathleen Marie said:
the NET 2.1 was designed to integrate with Strong's. For lower-income and foreign students, the NET 2.1 has greater potential to run in free software and on older and under-powered devices.
That's true. Though most popular translations can work with Strongs. I always argued that a Strongs number made more sense, than mispronouncing a greek word. The pastor: 'Now, as you all know, the word here in verse 23 is 430, and clearly not 122.' The congregation nods and amens enthusiastically.
The irony is the NET Notes are more useful for original languages and don't touch Strongs, that I remember. I'll stick with my NET Notes-1. Never did use the translation ... I guess it's ok.
0 -
The OT RI just downloaded.
Rick Brannan (Faithlife) said:Robert M. Warren said:Paul Caneparo said:The NET Bible (2nd Edition) automatically downloaded this morning.
I also note that, while the NT RVI also downloaded, the OT RVI hasn't appeared yet.
The OT Reverse Interlinear is not ready yet, but since the NT was we included it. The OT will be forthcoming; I do not have an estimate for its delivery at present.
macOS (Logos Pro - Beta) | Android 13 (Logos Stable)
0 -
Thanks..[Y]
0 -
[Y]
JK
MacBookPro 14" (2021) RAM:16GB SSD:1TB macOS Sequoia 15.4 | iPhone16ProMax iOS 18.4 | Logos Pro 41.1.6
0
