a question from an Accordance User
Comments
-
Michael Hanel said:DAL said:
Welcome to the family! You’re thread has racked up 14 pages already and it’s a fun thread too
👍😁👌
DAL
Funny how constructive engagement fosters conversation!
Yep... we love to talk about our Bible software and even on occasion have a spirited debate!
0 -
Mark Allison said:
Here's another cool tip. If you click on the "Visual Filters" button for a fairly complex resource like BDAG, select "Reformat—>Outline Formatting" and it will indent everything in a very easy-to-read way.
This guy has a few tips for BDAG in Logos that might interest you ....
Greek NT: How to use BDAG (and other Greek lexicons) featuring Logos Bible Software
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Don't forget the partnership between SIL and Logos ... Logos would assume a personal translation would be done in the SIL environment (Software Products - SIL Language Technology).
Earlier in this thread Dave H posted some sample code of a Logos Personal book containing Bible text. Is this thing you are talking about something different?
Note: I have some experience programming and it looks like it would be a simple task to write a conversion routine from Accordance personal Bible .TXT file to a Logos PBB Bible in the format that Dave described. If it only had to be done once, I could do it in my Ultraedit text editor using regular expressions and search/replace. It would then have to be loaded into some other program to save as .docx format.
I have worked with Bibleworks Version Database compiler, which took a simple text file as input, and it sounds like the Accordance import files are similar.
As far as thinking the Logos way is inferior, keep in mind that Logos is giving you a lot more power in that format. You can add your own tags and such. Others on the forum know a lot more about the PBB capability than I do.
0 -
John said:
If it only had to be done once, I could do it in my Ultraedit text editor
Hi John,
I know this was directed at MJ, but I just wanted to clarify something about my txt file. With the Accordance User Bible, I work on my translation, which is plain text in a txt format, then I upload it to Accordance without needing to mess up my file with any kind of HTML docx format. Then after a few days of working on it, I re-upload it and replace the file. I usually update the file 2 or 3 times a week.
If the text was static, I could see investing the time to do various "replace all" functions, converting it to rich text, then to docx, etc etc, but it is not a static text making it impractical to do multiple times a week, and the base text needs to remain in a plain text txt format.
So I know this doesn't actually address your question to MJ, but I just wanted to mention this in case it is helpful to know.0 -
John said:
Earlier in this thread Dave H posted some sample code of a Logos Personal book containing Bible text. Is this thing you are talking about something different?
Note: I have some experience programming and it looks like it would be a simple task to write a conversion routine from Accordance personal Bible .TXT file to a Logos PBB Bible in the format that Dave described. If it only had to be done once, I could do it in my Ultraedit text editor using regular expressions and search/replace. It would then have to be loaded into some other program to save as .docx format.
I have worked with Bibleworks Version Database compiler, which took a simple text file as input, and it sounds like the Accordance import files are similar.
As far as thinking the Logos way is inferior, keep in mind that Logos is giving you a lot more power in that format. You can add your own tags and such. Others on the forum know a lot more about the PBB capability than I do.
If you are serious about building PBs, you should look at the Files subforum: https://community.logos.com/forums/66.aspx
Some inspiration for PBs can be found on this wiki page https://wiki.logos.com/User_Contributed_Personal_Books which links back to forum threads with hundreds of PB sources. One Logos idea behind PBs was that users would make their own texts usable within Logos - and in a Windows environment, such texts would nearly always be in MS Word format. People do use MS Office or a free compatible program for that. One other idea was that PBs should not be second-class resources but work exactly like Logos resources, which is possible through the use of milestones, indexes and other meta-information which can easily put into a document. See https://wiki.logos.com/Personal_Books for instructions how. Thus you can build your own commentaries, calendar devotionals, lectionaries, lexicons, bibles... It is not the 100% full capability (we can't build interlinear or reverse interlinear bibles, or timelines), but comes very close.
Building a PB bible is quite possible (I haven't done that myself, but have maybe a dozen in my library) and actually there already is a converter that creates a Logos PB source from other formats - I think Michael Schierl from Germany built it and it should be on Github or Sourceforge somewhere. He was even able to build Strongs into one of his PB bibles. When building a PB for a highly milestone-structured text (I've done my share of type:lectionary books over the years) it may be advisable to use Excel or whatever spreadsheet software users on Mac tend to have - or get creative with your tools, since Word format actually is zipped XML.
Note that there's one structural thing for PB bibles and commentaries: Real world bibles have wildly differing verse counting (mostly visible in the Psalms or in some minor prophets, see here for the full scary reality), thus every existing bible in the Logos universe needs to adhere to exactly one verse map for the milestones defining the verse location - this is necessary for the Logos software to make sure your own bible or commentary displays Psalm 12 Verse 3 alongside that other bible or commentary where the same verse is Psalm 11 Verse 4.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
NB.Mick said:
...and actually there already is a converter that creates a Logos PB source from other formats - I think Michael Schierl from Germany built it and it should be on Github or Sourceforge somewhere. He was even able to build Strongs into one of his PB bibles.
https://github.com/schierlm/BibleMultiConverter
It seems to be able to convert files prepared for Accordance.
Alternatively, if you need to do the same search-and-replace functions regularly when converting your file, one way is to use a macro. Might be a bit of a stretch if you haven't used those, but it's a good thing to know anyway ;-)
0 -
This is very, very interesting... we need to build a multi-platform Accordance / Logos wiki page. Maybe it already exists, but I learned something new today.
Every day is a school day! 🙂
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
This is very, very interesting... we need to build a multi-platform Accordance / Logos wiki page. Maybe it already exists, but I learned something new today.
I did Logos wiki for a while (so good, my pages were eventually deleted!). But the point is, you can, and pretty straight-forward (Steve, now departed, helped me). Dave is now, honcho'ing .. I assume he'd want to input into where added, and style guide.
But that said, (no offense), it's a crutch. Imagine me trying to turn Accordance's high-speed magic, into Logos slow-and-go. I'd be wasting Accordance's power features. Same, in the opposite direction.
But the wiki does invite ... go for it.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Rick Mansfield said:
Factbook in Logos is not the same as Accordance Research. For the equivalent, go to Search.
There are search features in Logos that just aren't found in Accordance. For example, you can search by "addressee" in Logos. The speed of the search is pretty impressive too.
0 -
Mark Allison said:
There are search features in Logos that just aren't found in Accordance. For example, you can search by "addressee" in Logos. The speed of the search is pretty impressive too.
That's really interesting. [:)] Thank you for the screenshot!
0 -
The data sets built into Logos allow for some very cool searches. For example Person:Jesus finds where he is referenced by a pronoun and not his name. For me the key to my workflow is my saved layouts. My main layout allows me to focus on the text, but have access easily to my entire library as set up with tags and collections. Logos is very customizable, and as such, can have a longer learning curve to figure out what works best for you.
I have used and owned most of the bible software programs over the years and have settled on Logos as my go to primarily due to the extensive library available. Accordance is second, but I have quit adding resources to it. I have the essential texts and tools so it is useful. They have fallen way behind Logos in terms of resources available (why were the journals never updated?) and basic technology over the web and mobile devices.
Welcome to Logos.
0 -
Mark Allison said:
Last time I checked (and it's been a LONG time) most of the SIL tools were Windows only.
Most Windows software can be run on MacOS using WineHQ. It even works on Apple silicon.
0 -
John Fidel said:
They have fallen way behind Logos in terms of resources available (why were the journals never updated?)
We were told 3-4 years ago that the journals were coming. The latest update is that Nathan has a phone number for someone at Galaxie. 🤷🏻♂️
0 -
Jonathan Huber said:
The latest update is that Nathan has a phone number for someone at Galaxie.
Several years ago, the owner of Galaxie Software was interesting performing the tagging of the journals for use in Accordance. The powers that be thought it would take too much time to train him. So that got put on the back burner, mostly because nobody had the time to work on them (it's a massive project). And that was back when Accordance had triple the number of developers that they do now.
I own all the journals in Accordance and yet I'm buying them all over again in Logos, if that tells you anything about my confidence in Accordance's ability to update this library.0 -
John Fidel said:
The data sets built into Logos allow for some very cool searches.
The datasets in Logos is something that I know I am not fully utilising. It really is a bit like Alice in Wonderland... how deep does this hole go? Endless hours of fun and possibilities.
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:John Fidel said:
The data sets built into Logos allow for some very cool searches.
The datasets in Logos is something that I know I am not fully utilising. It really is a bit like Alice in Wonderland... how deep does this hole go? Endless hours of fun and possibilities.
I just learned about the Search sidebar! Lots of cool and easy-to-use options here!
0 -
Mark Allison said:
I own all the journals in Accordance and yet I'm buying them all over again in Logos, if that tells you anything about my confidence in Accordance's ability to update this library.
Also, some of the standard fare that Accordance has always carried such as commentaries and Bibles, is not up to date as well. This is ok on one level because in my current use case I don't need the latest scholarship on a very demanding level, but it is still helpful to have some new titles of interest.
So the question is, if I can't get them at Accordance, then where else do I go? Paper or Kindle is a possibility, but I would prefer for them to be in another Bible software platform, which has always led me to Logos. Overall, Logos has had more resources for many years, so there is nothing new in this. However, it is more noticeable than ever of how far Accordance is now behind in areas that it used to be a lot more up to date, including journals. This doesn't even take into consideration expanding the offering of journals as well.
I don't know what it will take to really turn the tide on this for them, other than more developers. With deliverables like finishing up the features of version 14 and catching up languishing apps, it is not beyond imagination that Accordance will increasingly need to focus on a core set of resources that it must keep up to date. I don't envy their challenges that lie ahead.
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
The datasets in Logos is something that I know I am not fully utilising. It really is a bit like Alice in Wonderland... how deep does this hole go? Endless hours of fun and possibilities.
haha, for sure the first time I have heard studying the Bible compared to Alice going on a trip. [:)] That said, it can provide both endless hours of fun, and endless hours of frustration. What I have found works best is to do my work like normal in Accordance, then when I need a break to play around with Logos. [:)]
Mark Allison said:I just learned about the Search sidebar! Lots of cool and easy-to-use options here!
Thanks for the screenshot! Super helpful. [:)]
0 -
Mark Allison said:
I just learned about the Search sidebar! Lots of cool and easy-to-use options here!
If you keep this up Mark, you are going to cause me to start to go down another rabbit hole! LOL!
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
Overall, Logos has had more resources for many years, so there is nothing new in this. However, it is more noticeable than ever of how far Accordance is now behind in areas that it used to be a lot more up to date, including journals. This doesn't even take into consideration expanding the offering of journals as well.
This is really tragic. Are there specific resources besides journals coming to your mind contrasting the two companies?
Donovan R. Palmer said:I don't know what it will take to really turn the tide on this for them, other than more developers. With deliverables like finishing up the features of version 14 and catching up languishing apps, it is not beyond imagination that Accordance will increasingly need to focus on a core set of resources that it must keep up to date. I don't envy their challenges that lie ahead.
I agree 100%. If I were some sort of Accordance advisor, I would say to focus on the areas where Accordance is already ahead and really finesse those areas, and not waste time on stuff like the web. Even if Accordance gets that out the door finally, it won't be at a Logos quality and seems like a huge waste of time and resources.
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
Also, some of the standard fare that Accordance has always carried such as commentaries and Bibles, is not up to date as well.
I have no idea what Accordance's development plans are, but I'd bet that you'll won't see any updates to journals until after Accordance updates some of its standard commentaries.
0 -
Mark Allison said:Jonathan Huber said:
The latest update is that Nathan has a phone number for someone at Galaxie.
Several years ago, the owner of Galaxie Software was interesting performing the tagging of the journals for use in Accordance. The powers that be thought it would take too much time to train him. So that got put on the back burner, mostly because nobody had the time to work on them (it's a massive project). And that was back when Accordance had triple the number of developers that they do now.
I own all the journals in Accordance and yet I'm buying them all over again in Logos, if that tells you anything about my confidence in Accordance's ability to update this library.Yeah, I hear you on that. Im not prepared to duplicate my whole library right away, but I’ve started marking the various bundles that would get me as close as possible for a reasonable cost. Theyll stay on the wish list for now while I figure out how the program works, and maybe it’ll change with the new library releases anyway.
0 -
Jonathan Huber said:
Im not prepared to duplicate my whole library right away, but I’ve started marking the various bundles that would get me as close as possible for a reasonable cost.
I really hope Accordance bounces back, because competition is healthy. But part of me wishes Logos would buy Accordance, like they did with WORDsearch. But I can't think of a single way that Logos would benefit from the acquisition, other than gaining customers. And frankly, I think Logos will probably acquire those customers eventually anyway.
0 -
Mark Allison said:
I really hope Accordance bounces back, because competition is healthy.
I hope so too for the same reason!
Mark Allison said:But part of me wishes Logos would buy Accordance, like they did with WORDsearch. But I can't think of a single way that Logos would benefit from the acquisition, other than gaining customers. And frankly, I think Logos will probably acquire those customers eventually anyway.
Monopoly or not, I would rather Logos buy it than for it to go under. I think the motive to do it would be in part to acquire customers, but it could also arguably be seen as a ministry. Logos simply isn't Accordance, and those of us who use it on an intense level really need it.
0 -
Kristin said:
This is really tragic. Are there specific resources besides journals coming to your mind contrasting the two companies?
To be honest, this slippage has been going on so long that I stopped tracking what I might buy if they had it. So a few missing and updated volumes that come readily to mind...
Word Biblical Commentaries - missing volumes, missing update like Daniel - was my first ever big commentary purchase, and if I was stranded on a desert island, would be probably my pick if I could only have one...
Tyndale Commentaries - missing volumes - one of goto's in one my workflows
EGGNT - missing volumes - something I consult almost every day in my current language studies.
Baylor Handbooks - use all the time and no volumes in Accordance at all
NRSVue. It was FINALLY recently released in Accordance, but it is not tagged. This is in my lineup of my text comparisons in Logos and is fully tagged.
I could go on, but these are not niche market resources for specialist scholar studies... these are items that show up in best of lists. I get it about publishers and licenses, etc... but my theory is they are slow to market due to organisational and developer capacity.
Journals are even collectively further off and if you want to venture beyond Galaxie's offering...
I'm genuinely not being negative. It is and has been out of an abundance of concern that competition is healthy, and it seems it is decreasing month by month.
0 -
Hi Donovan,
Thank you for clarifying. What you wrote surprised me on a few points, so I thus have a couple questions....
Donovan R. Palmer said:Word Biblical Commentaries
I have Word in Accordance. If I am understanding correctly, the actual copyright of Accordance's copy is an older version than what is Logos. Am I understanding this correctly?
Donovan R. Palmer said:I could go on, but these are not niche market resources for specialist scholar studies
I agree. Concerning Accordance missing ANET, do you consider that niche? Or do you find it bizarre that Accordance still doesn't have it?
Donovan R. Palmer said:I'm genuinely not being negative. It is and has been out of an abundance of concern that competition is healthy, and it seems it is decreasing month by month.
I understand completely and agree 100%.
0 -
Kristin said:
Or do you find it bizarre that Accordance still doesn't have it?
Accordance users have been asking for ANET for years. There's always a tension at Accordance between creating modules that the core users want, and creating modules that will actually make money for the company. It was a hard balance to achieve when I used to work there. And now that Accordance has less than 1/2 of the developers they used to have, I can't imagine how they're keeping up.
0 -
Mark Allison said:
And now that Accordance has less than 1/2 of the developers they used to have, I can't imagine how they're keeping up.
Wow... that is crazy, and sad.
I found these videos extremely helpful to me since Logos is a bit different than most Bible software setups.
https://support.logos.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017433892-Logos-10-Basic-Bible-Study-Series
Logos website is so full of info, I find myself getting lost in it.
0 -
Mark Allison said:Kristin said:
Or do you find it bizarre that Accordance still doesn't have it?
Accordance users have been asking for ANET for years. There's always a tension at Accordance between creating modules that the core users want, and creating modules that will actually make money for the company. It was a hard balance to achieve when I used to work there. And now that Accordance has less than 1/2 of the developers they used to have, I can't imagine how they're keeping up.
I was happy to see ANET in the package I chose.
0 -
Mark Allison said:
Accordance users have been asking for ANET for years. There's always a tension at Accordance between creating modules that the core users want, and creating modules that will actually make money for the company.
Hi Mark,
I am sure I am missing something obvious, but why is there a dichotomy between the modules people want and what makes money? It seems like if people want it, it will make money. ANET is a good example. As you said, a lot of people have requested ANET, and every time people request it a bunch of people liked it. So it seems like if they gave us ANET, all those people would turn into sales. By contrast, adding these fluff books no one asks for, it doesn't seem like that would make money, as the customers don't want it.
Mark Allison said:And now that Accordance has less than 1/2 of the developers they used to have, I can't imagine how they're keeping up.
Well, I would argue they aren't keeping up. The infamous highlight and note corruption issues are still there, there isn't web access, though I don't use it, I am aware of the Android chaos, etc, etc. So I really don't understand why the developer team was cut. It seems like a super weird business move. It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall during one of those meetings to hear the logic behind the decision.
Jonathan Huber said:I was happy to see ANET in the package I chose.
Same here! I was for sure one of the people in Accordance repeatedly asking for ANET. Last year I finally gave up and actually bought it as a physical book, but I appreciate having it computerized finally in Logos. [:)]
0
