How would you improve our search helps?
Comments
-
- Search is fundamental to Logos; it should be fun and educational to interact with.
- As of now Bible Browser is the best example in Logos of the above principle.
- The steps necessary to arrive at the desired result should be easy to recall.
- I think others have pointed this out, but the need for bracketing and such should be hidden.
- Boolean operators should be suggested or supplied by search.
I wonder how we can apply these criteria to Graham's response to the query put forward by xnman.
I know you were just giving a couple of examples but thought it might be useful to think about how you can search for these in Logos
Presumably in this case, you would like the mention of 1 Chronicles to be "near" the mention of "two wives"
Or .... [ Resource: 1 Chronicles .... Search: two wives ] ----- then it would search every resource that is or has 1 Chronicles references to "two wives" , Dictionaries, monograph, articles, etc. Anything in my library. ...
For this you could use the search string "two wives" NEAR <1 Chron> (with the angle brackets allowing the reference to be given in a variety of ways and for it still to match- Graham assumed that the references to 1 Chronicles would have to be close to the mention of "two wives"
- so he understands that proximity is relevant to that solution and he had a search operator in mind (he used the word "near"). Would you have understood that from the original request? Would you have framed the request differently?
- xnman understood that he was searching for a phrase, so he used the expression "two wives".
- the next part is how to express 1 Chronicles. Should your query be:
- "two wives" near 1 Chronicles and let Search figure out the rest without additional bracketing?
- Search may then ask: Did you mean "two wives" NEAR <1 Chronicles> ?
- You then hit Enter and are pleasantly surprised with the results! You learn that near has to be uppercase and that the bible reference has to be bracketed because "1 Chronicles" would look for that exact phrase and you would end up with a couple of results instead of a hundred or so. And current Search would look for 1 AND Chronicles!
- Search could also have suggested "two wives" NEAR <Bible ~1 Chronicles> --> How would you react to that?
- it gives the same results but is more precise in recognizing that 1 Chronicles is a Bible reference.
- the ~ signifies bible references like 1 Chron 4:5 with chapter and/or verse, but it can be omitted.
- Are you satisfied with a hundred results, or is that too much? You might try "two wives" NEAR <1 Chronicles 4:5> as that is the exact reference in the bible and it does narrow the results.
- If your original query had been "two wives" 1 Chronicles would you have been satisfied with "two wives" AND <1 Chronicles> because "Boolean operators should be suggested or supplied..."?
- There is another dimension to this query because you could have searched for "two wives" as follows:
- i.e. search that passage in a collection of your Commentaries.
- One of the primary goals of the GUI is to return relevant data using a method that is intuitive and requires limited steps.
- Towards that end the student should learn the concept of a proximity search as you have mentioned, but...
- In addition the effects of other Boolean operators should be explored, e.g., WITHIN, etc.
- It would be desirable for the GUI to supply results for the range of choices for the various operator options. Then the student would select the most applicable result. For instance NEAR 79,000 results in 1,000 resources vs. WITHIN 28 results in 5 resources and so on.
- I know I've not been exhaustive with my comments, but I expect the experts will see these observations and interpret them meaningfully and logically
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 15.1 1TB SSD
0 -
I think others have pointed this out, but the need for bracketing and such should be hidden.
As long as there are elements that can have 1 or more sub-elements, and as long as there are sub-elements that can appear under more than one main element [think as long as there are labels], bracketing of some sort must be present and visible. At least until we can have a mind-meld with the Logos application [;)]
Bracketing is also required when one needs to define groups such as "A and at least one of B,C,D" -- although here the "bracket" could be a keyword such as list, group, ...
Boolean operators should be suggested or supplied by search.
The Boolean operators are limited to AND, OR, and ANDNOT. I can see them offered as a choice but I struggle to see how the computer would know which I intended for it to suggest or supply the value.
The only reason I went back to respond to this post is to point out that users must have reasonable expectations. The computer does not yet read our minds. The fundamental work to know what we need to search for is the users' responsibility. Simplifying the search argument needs to be done -- but it will not resolve all the complaints. The Guides, Factbook, and Bible Browser are Logos' effort to minimize the heavy lifting that the user has to accomplish.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I have long felt that "Basic" Search should have been called "General" Search instead.
The German interface has "Library" ("Bibliothek") search ... and I struggled at first to find the "Basic" search button in the row of search settings.[;)]
I suppose the terminology "Basic" is used to indicate a search for "basic plain words/expressions", i.e. without special formats, reference, language, etc. involved ?
Wolfgang Schneider
(BibelCenter)
0 -
speaker:jesus type:question addressee:peter
Why can't it be like this?
I hear you, PL.
why do we have to use INTERSECTS all the time (instead of the more common AND)?
{Speaker <Person Jesus>} AND {Addressee <Person Peter>}
{Speaker <Person Jesus>} INTERSECTS {Addressee <Person Peter>}You can use the former if you wish - but you'd get results if there were two speeches in a verse where one is spoken by Jesus and the other is addressed to Peter. INTERSECTS ensures that both the speaker and addressee parts of the query refer to the same speech. It's not required, but it's a more precise option. I'm not sure there's any way around that distinction, because for some searches you'll want the former, and other times you'll want the latter.
0 -
The only reason I went back to respond to this post is to point out that users must have reasonable expectations
Thank you, MJ, for revisiting this string.
Knowledge level of computers + searches:
Some know a lot......Some know medium-ish...... Some know little.
I know little. I do not like computer-choice complexity.
But, I never know re Searches if Logos could invent a better set-up [due to my lack of knowledge].
Dave, above, showed the complexity of possibility.
I have always wondered if FL could make searches better. Did they max their effort, or move on to other projects?
After Mark's efforts, I will know FL did their very best in this area. Then it will be up to me to learn { ( [ INTERSECTS ] ) }.
0 -
Again Thanks to Mark for starting this thread!! I am greatly encouraged that you would take time to actually do this as I know you must be very busy with other things.
Thank you.
Now...
{Speaker <Person Jesus>} INTERSECTS {Addressee <Person Peter>} .....
How much study time do I have to commit to learn how to do that? and then to remember it if I don't use it every day? I use to program ("C++" "ASP" "Prolog" "Fortran").... and believe me, I could not count the hours I spent fixing a program all because I forgot a curly brace {} or a comma. And now we are expected to know all that to do a search?
How about simplifying... with a template... we have a template "Two People Mentioned Together" maybe add an option to that template or add another template for it?
And why not have templates for Basic, Media, Clause and Morph?
And then maybe have the template comes up automatically when I type in certain keywords and not have to chose "Bible, Basic, Media, Clause, Morph" at all? I don't know how many times I make the wrong choice and then have to start all over...
Edit: ---- I believe because of the way I search.... that I would soon learn and remember the keyword to get the template to use in my search ---- end edit.
And as an afterthought... I know users have responsibility to learn... and to have reasonable expectations... But somewhere there is this concept that programs are written for users.... and out of that concept grew the concept of "user friendly programs". When a program is "user friendly" ...then users will use it more (at least in theory). Myself included. I see a lot of people going elsewhere to do their searches...
Search in Logos... just is not user friendly. IMHO .... [8-|]
Thanks for trying to make it better.... and I have every confidence and expectation that it will be better!
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
Thank you for all of your responses and thank you Mark for starting this thread and listening to users' feedback.
Wolfgang, I think "Library Search" is a much better name than "Basic Search" or "General Search"!
Mark and MJ, thanks explaining the difference between AND and INTERSECTS. Now I understand (I think). Maybe it's just the very technical/mathematical-sounding name of INTERSECTS that put me off from trying it since it was introduced. Maybe something like ALSO might be a more user-friendly term? But obviously it's too late to change that after so many years in use.
MJ, thanks for your detailed comments. Unfortunately most of them flew above my head. I guess the challenge for Mark and for FL is to balance the needs for expert users like MJ and others on the one hand, and average/novice users like xnman and myself on the other hand.
I sincerely hope that FL can hear and respond to the voices of those of us who are average/novice users. I have a feeling that this group constitutes the vast majority of Logos/Verbum users.
0 -
I sincerely hope that FL can hear and respond to the voices of those of us who are average/novice users. I have a feeling that this group constitutes the vast majority of Logos/Verbum users.
The last major release had several changes directed towards the average/novice users - Bible Browser, search templates and enhanced Factbook come to mind. I would expect FaithLife to continue to press in this direction.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I support replacing the confusing term "Basic Search" with the term "General Search".
I also support DOCUMENTING SEARCH PROPERLY within the program. Please forgive my yelling. And then vote for documenting Search properly, here.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Wolfgang, I think "Library Search" is a much better name than "Basic Search" or "General Search"!
Library search is a search of one's Library using the Library pane.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Mark and MJ, thanks explaining the difference between AND and INTERSECTS. Now I understand (I think). Maybe it's just the very technical/mathematical-sounding name of INTERSECTS that put me off from trying it since it was introduced. Maybe something like ALSO might be a more user-friendly term? But obviously it's too late to change that after so many years in use.
Would you prefer OVERLAPS?
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Well... for what it's worth.... I actually used search today and actually found what I was looking for... Maybe there's hope for me yet...
Call me novice... unlearned... whatever.... But... I still don't think I should have to "take classes in hieroglyphics" to do a search in Logos... As I have stated... I want to study my Bible and I want a search to help me do that.... I don't want to have to "study" search each time I go to use it or do a different kind of search ... because that changes my focus to learning search instead of Bible study... search should be something that helps.... not slows me down... I just don't see that happening a lot with the current search in Logos.
I think there have been some good suggestions in this thread.... I do pray Faithlife will consider them and I have every confidence that they will..... and ... I look forward to a better search in Logos.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
Well... for what it's worth.... I actually used search today and actually found what I was looking for... Maybe there's hope for me yet...
[y][y]I don't want to have to "study" search each time I go to use it or do a different kind of search ... because that changes my focus to learning search instead of Bible study... search should be something that helps.... not slows me down... I just don't see that happening a lot with the current search in Logos.
I get that. With some things we do, we expect (and perhaps want) to have to learn how to do them well, but other things, we want to be nice and simple--like using a microwave to reheat leftovers.
I look forward to a better search in Logos.
Me too.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0
