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; } } }

Why the difference?

Milkman

I get the "reason" why some books are Reader Editions and others are Research Editions. But, who or what makes that decision?

I'm reading a book, Formed for the Glory of God: Learning from the Spiritual Practices of Jonathan Edwards which has many references to his Works, but are not tagged.

However, the other Resource I'm reading - Jonathan Edwards and the Life of God: Toward an Evangelical Theology of Participation is fully tagged (Research Ed.).

Is the difference because one book, the latter, references more works other than just the primary literature of Edwards? Such as The Fathers, Secondary lit and Church scholars?

If that's the case, fair enough, but it's a pain in the butt to copy and search for quotes in Reader Editon books.

Also, and I only ask because I don't know, does one 'type' of edition require much more time to produce than the other? Hence cost factors?

I'm sure there are many books that FL has on their list to get out to us, which most if not all of us are thankful fore, but I thought I'd ask.

Enquiring minds want to know.

mm.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Jeremy White

Reader editions are basically ebooks with some automatic scanning for Bible verses, etc. It means they can be quickly made available. Research Editions take more time because of the additional tagging effort.

FYI, if you have purchased the reader edtion and Logos subsequently comes out with a Reasearch edition of that some book you will automatically receive the Research Edition.

Bobby Terhune

I have noticed a large percentage of books that should be Research Editions are put out as Reader Editions. Quite a few series started out Reasearch Editions and newer titles are now Reader.

The decision on which edition to use seems very arbitrary right now. I don't know how well trained they are to make that distinction.

Cutting costs is the main reason, and Reader Editions are quicker to make, BUT....Without proper tagging for the books that need it, the reason we pay extra for these books goes away.

I've also noticed prices for Ebooks are higher than they used to be, and that's with no tagging, page numbers or anything.

DMB

Enquiring minds want to know.

I think it (your examples) depends on the Logosian archeological layer. As Bobby mentions, the most recent layer appears to be a combination of economics, and staffing (ability to deliver at least 'something').

Lower layers are earlier policies ... prepub, spend time, promise, ship. The very lowest layers involved other companies .. whatever struck them (Libby-cation). And in-between is the well-known murky layer ... WS in Logosian parlence.

For me, the bigger mystery is why reader vs prepub. Being a well-trained Logosian, prepub just means check Amazon.

Bobby Terhune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304496#Comment_1304496

Prepub used to be top quality tagging with all books available at the time of production, and Logos wanted to be guaranteed a market for that title before investing in production costs.

I'm with DMB, I don't see a good reason to put Readers Editions and Ebooks on prepub.

I've noticed a decline in the quality of Research Editions the last few years, namely missed tagging to book that are in the Logos ecosystem. Like Milkman said, it's a big pain to search for quotes.

My biggest complaint with Logos is not with needing new features but with the tagging of the books I paid premium money to get. Something has changed in the content creation department and it hasn't been for the better in my opinion.

ReformedDoc

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304501#Comment_1304501

The readers editions are just that, if you plan on studying, and learning the subject the ebooks are not what you are looking for.

Bobby Terhune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304505#Comment_1304505

Some academic publishers are releasing mainly Ebooks. Such as Cascade and Pickwick from WIPF & Stock. Also Fortress Press Academic is mostly Ebooks now.

I think Logos needs a better plan for Academic orientated books that are in the Ebook format, to make them more useful in Logos.

ReformedDoc

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304508#Comment_1304508

I agree especially since one of the bonuses of a digital library is the searching, so it kind of defeats the purpose for many.

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304501#Comment_1304501

I've noticed a decline in the quality of Research Editions the last few years, namely missed tagging to book that are in the Logos ecosystem.

This has been a problem with Logos for a very long time. I make a new thread about it every year or so whenever I find a particularly egregious example. My most recent: https://community.logos.com/forums/p/223590/1302715.aspx

I thought the situation would improve with bifurcating books into Research vs. Reader editions, but some of the "Research editions" are tagged almost as scantily as Reader editions. You never know the quality of tagging in a book until you buy it and start reading.

John

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304512#Comment_1304512

Why can't they use AI to automatically tag every book? It should deliver 100% accuracy and only take 5 minutes [H]

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304551#Comment_1304551

Why can't they use AI to automatically tag every book? It should deliver 100% accuracy and only take 5 minutes

What a good idea. Would that even work?

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304578#Comment_1304578

Why can't they use AI to automatically tag every book? It should deliver 100% accuracy and only take 5 minutes

What a good idea. Would that even work?

It was suggested in the thread I linked above, and Mark says they are working on it. Really I see that as the only way they can do it as the catalogue has thousands if not millions of missing links.

Bernhard

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304551#Comment_1304551

AI to automatically tag every book? It should deliver 100% accuracy

I don't think that is possible. It is certainly possible to have AI provide a lot of the missing links, but not without any mistake.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304581#Comment_1304581

AI to automatically tag every book? It should deliver 100% accuracy

I don't think that is possible. It is certainly possible to have AI provide a lot of the missing links, but not without any mistake.

Having it provide even 90% of the links with 10% inaccuracy would be better than not having most of the links at all. I'm guessing they could get it up to more like 98% accuracy, like they do with the OCR of old texts (I'm guessing on the accuracy number. I think it's higher for certain types of texts). Occasionally errors slip in, but we can report them through the Report Typo command. Not that they get around to fixing those with any degree of rapidity, but it's better than not having access to those texts at all.

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1304632#Comment_1304632

Having it provide even 90% of the links with 10% inaccuracy would be better than not having most of the links at all. I'm guessing they could get it up to more like 98% accuracy, like they do with the OCR of old texts (I'm guessing on the accuracy number. I think it's higher for certain types of texts). Occasionally errors slip in, but we can report them through the Report Typo command. Not that they get around to fixing those with any degree of rapidity, but it's better than not having access to those texts at all.

I agree completely. It would work especially well for works that have a standardized notation for making reference to them, like Karl Barth's Dogmatics. Hundreds/thousands of references to it in different works are/were* unlinked. AI should be able to do it pretty easily. (Actually it should have been relatively easy to program an automation for it years ago but Logos didn't for some reason. All it would take is a search/replace string with a few simple conditions.)

*This is a problem that is very frustrating when you encounter it reading through a book. I know that Logos has gone back from time to time and updated the books with better linking, but after you've read it once, tried to click on the reference and gotten frustrated because you have to open it manually, it leaves a bad taste in the month and you move on. Unless it's like a reference work, you don't keep monitoring it over the years to see if it got the linking it should have had from the beginning.