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; } } }

Curiousity regarding priority of setting resource priorities

MJ. Smith

Several years ago, the forum reflected user dissatisfaction with the way resource priorities are set. Shall we say it was a very lively discussion with differing opinions reflecting the size of libraries and the way Logos was being used. I am curious why the dissatisfaction died down without any major changes - especially for those who were very vocal years ago.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

DMB

Like this post?

https://community.logos.com/forums/t/199146.aspx?ssi=0

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1181529#Comment_1181529

Yes - amplified version.

danwdoo

I would call it more beaten down into a puddle of hopelessness of any relief than any reduction in dissatisfaction. The larger one's library grows, the more painful this process becomes and I know I've spent a ridiculous amount of time on what should be a simple process due to the awful current implementation. It's yet another area where Faithlife seems to inadvertently punish continued resource purchases in a large library as that means dragging new items slowly through an insanely long list to put them where they need to go if you want any real organization of priorities.

Dave Hooton

I am curious why the dissatisfaction died down without any major changes

Users and FL got involved with Dark Mode & Sermon Builder bugs and limitations[:P]

Prioritizing is crude but it works (esp. with the "headings" workaround) and FL found too many exceptions for a more sophisticated approach.