Bold Typos

In the NASB, there are NUMEROUS cases of BOLD typos scattered throughout the whole resource. In most cases it is the first letter in the first world of a sentence, and in many cases it seems to happen after quote marks or colons (keystrokes requiring the use of SHIFT).

I started in Revelation and working backward I found bold typos in:

James 1:1, 3:5

1 Peter 1:1, 5:14

2 Peter 1:1, 2:10

Jude 1

Revelation 2:1, 2:8, 2:12, 2:18, 3:1, 3:7, 3:14, 7:12, 11:15, 12:10, 13:1, 15:3, 19:1, 19:5, 19:6

Obviously, there are more than just the ones I have listed here. I was going to make typo reports for each of these, but I got tired just thinking about it, so I've decided to post here instead. This is a systemic issue in this resource for whatever reason (I flagged these in L3, but checked and see the same in L4) that really should be fixed. This ought to be a quick and easy correction...the bold letters rather jump out at you when you scroll through, being that they're bold an all. Please address this issue.

Also, I would appreciate it if a Logosite would acknowledge my pain...er, I mean my post. Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rich DeRuiter

I started in Revelation and working backward I found bold typos in:

James 1:1, 3:5 . . .

I'm seeing some of these, but not others. For example I don't see the James 1:1 bold typo, but I do see a bold verse number in 1:1, 2, 12, 2:1, 8, 14, 18, 3:1, (not at 3:5 though, or in the text) etc. In fact, I'm seeing bolded verse numbers scattered throughout the resource in these books (James-Revelation).

The 1st bold typo I see from your list is in 1Peter 5:14, where the first letter of the word "Peace" is bold. Then 2Peter 2:10 "Daring." Then Rev 3:1 & 7 "He," 7:12 the first "Amen," 12:10 "Now," 15:3 "Great," 19:1 "Hallelujah," 19:5 "Give," 19:6 "Hallelujah." I don't see the bolding issues in the other verses you cite (unless I'm just not noticing them with my current font & size).

Did you report these as typos?

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169396#Comment_169396

I guess someone must have been taking Luther literally when he said "Sin boldly." [:)]

Paul N

In the NASB, there are NUMEROUS cases of BOLD typos scattered throughout the whole resource. In most cases it is the first letter in the first world of a sentence, ...

My New Testament professor, while emphasizing Biblical context, always told us "Get in the first century!"

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169396#Comment_169396

I started in Revelation and working backward I found bold typos in:

James 1:1, 3:5 . . .

Did you report these as typos?

No, Richard...I didn't report them, mainly because there are dozens if not hundreds of these if one goes through the entire NASB looking for them. My hope and request is that someone from Logos will read this thread and let us know that they will tend to this issue. Being a chronic problem, but one that literally sticks out, it seems like someone could just scan through the entire book and make a visual once through, correcting as they go. Once that process is completed and a Logos employee posts that the job has been done, then after the next update I, you, and everyone else can keep our eyes open for any errant bolds that may have squeeked through.

At least that's my take on what should happen.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169396#Comment_169396

I started in Revelation and working backward I found bold typos in:

James 1:1, 3:5 . . .

I'm seeing some of these, but not others. For example I don't see the James 1:1 bold typo, but I do see a bold verse number in 1:1, 2, 12, 2:1, 8, 14, 18, 3:1, (not at 3:5 though, or in the text) etc. In fact, I'm seeing bolded verse numbers scattered throughout the resource in these books (James-Revelation).

The 1st bold typo I see from your list is in 1Peter 5:14, where the first letter of the word "Peace" is bold. Then 2Peter 2:10 "Daring." Then Rev 3:1 & 7 "He," 7:12 the first "Amen," 12:10 "Now," 15:3 "Great," 19:1 "Hallelujah," 19:5 "Give," 19:6 "Hallelujah." I don't see the bolding issues in the other verses you cite (unless I'm just not noticing them with my current font & size).

The bolded letter in James 1:1 is the "T" in "To" as in "To the Twelve"...unusual since it isn't the first word (not "world" [:P]) in the sentence--most cases it is. In James 3:5 it is the "S" in the word "See" that begins the second sentence in the verse. I'm pretty sure all of the verses I mentioned have an errant BOLD since I tagged each one with a note and typed my list from that note file's list. There is one that I skipped accidentally when tagging them:

Rev. 7:10 The "S" in "Salvation".

Richard, the bolded verse numbers correspond roughly to Topic Changes (aka parshas in Hebrew)...I'm not concerned with those--as far as I've ever noticed they seem to be accurate. I think the Logos folks are fond of using the Greek word pericope.

PLEASE, someone from Logos let us know that this is being addressed.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169866#Comment_169866

No, Richard...I didn't report them, mainly because there are dozens if not hundreds of these if one goes through the entire NASB looking for them. My hope and request is that someone from Logos will read this thread and let us know that they will tend to this issue. Being a chronic problem, but one that literally sticks out, it seems like someone could just scan through the entire book and make a visual once through, correcting as they go.

Then it's probably better to send email to logos4feedback (at) logos (dot) com. I sent a report of a typo that I couldn't report using the Report Typo tool (because it was in non-selectable text in a media resource) to that email address, and got a reply back the next day from our friend Melissa Snyder who apparently is monitoring that email address. [:)]

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169874#Comment_169874

Then I will do that, Rosie. Thanks.

Silly me...I figured someone from Logos actually monitored the "Suggestions" thread. [^o)]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169876#Comment_169876

Then I will do that, Rosie. Thanks.

Silly me...I figured someone from Logos actually monitored the "Suggestions" thread.

I think they were initially intending to when they set up the forums, but the amount of traffic got way out of control and they haven't been able to hire fast enough to get someone assigned to doing just that. They've been overwhelmed by the unexpected success of L4, the influx of new users, and the popularity of the forums. They've finally got their Customer Service staffing up enough to be able to handle the call volume as of a couple of months ago, but still haven't caught up on monitoring the forum. Melissa Snyder is the only one whose primary role is that (and she has other work to do, too). Others will check in now and then as they have time. Even Melissa can't keep up with much more than the actual bug report posts (which will normally be entered on the PC Beta or Logos 4 Mac forums, and normally stand out better to her when they've got a version number or prefix of BUG: at the beginning of the subject line).

So for now, it appears that posting in the Suggestions forum is just what we do when we want to get a dialog going amongst users about how good a particular feature suggestion or resource suggestion would be. If we really want to get feature ideas heard by Logos though, we need to post it on UserVoice, and hope for lots of votes, or for resource suggestions, email it to suggest (at) logos (dot) com, and be at the mercy of whatever their internal process is for going through those emails and prioritizing the suggestions. On UserVoice at least we get some feedback when Logos agrees to start working on a feature that lots of us want.

And I don't think that problem/bug/typo reports were ever intended to be collected via the Suggestions forum. I think it was meant to be for new feature suggestions, or feature enhancement ideas, or requested resources.

For more info on reporting problems to Logos, see: http://www.logos.com/support/reportaproblem

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/169873#Comment_169873

The bolded letter in James 1:1 is the "T" in "To" as in "To the Twelve"...unusual since it isn't the first word (not "world" ) in the sentence--most cases it is. In James 3:5 it is the "S" in the word "See" that begins the second sentence in the verse. I'm pretty sure all of the verses I mentioned have an errant BOLD since I tagged each one with a note and typed my list from that note file's list. There is one that I skipped accidentally when tagging them:

Rev. 7:10 The "S" in "Salvation".

Richard, the bolded verse numbers correspond roughly to Topic Changes (aka parshas in Hebrew)...I'm not concerned with those--as far as I've ever noticed they seem to be accurate. I think the Logos folks are fond of using the Greek word pericope.

PLEASE, someone from Logos let us know that this is being addressed.

David, your post in the Vyrso thread made me go check this out.

I looked at my paper NASB95, and it has the same letters bolded. So I was thinking that, since it's always the first letter of a sentence, it means the same thing that the bold verse numbers do (i.e. bold verse numbers indicate a new paragraph at the start of the verse and bold first letters indicate a paragraph break in the middle of the verse).

I have two other paper NASBs, and it turns out they have paragraph marks (¶) at the beginning of the same sentences that the bold letters occur. One of those is a NASB95, and it has both paragraph marks and bold letters, while the other is an original NASB (1977), and it only has paragraph marks at those locations (no bold letters). So it appears that the bold letters may be a "feature" of the Revised NASB.

By the way, James 1:1 has a paragraph mark before the "To" in my paper
NASB95, but not my paper NASB77. That must have been one of the
updates. [:)]

Here's photos of my three paper NASBs at the Rev 7:10 position:

NASB95 (bold letters only):

NASB95 (bold letters and ¶ marks):

NASB77 (¶ marks only):

What do you think?

EDIT: Then I realized I should look at the prefatory material, and I found this.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/254127#Comment_254127

What do you think?

I think it's a shame that a customer had to figure this out, for one.

I also think it is a fairly boneheaded feature. It looks sloppy...terribly sloppy. And since there aren't any "true" paragraphs in the original text, if a publisher wants to indicate a paragraph, they can good and well create a paragraph...you know, indents and whatnot. Why on earth do otherwise???

Anyway, if what you've discovered is true, and it appears to be, I guess I can go back and erase the notes I made in my NASB for dozens of these MISTAKES...which they still are IMO.

Thanks for shedding light on this, Todd.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/254284#Comment_254284

if a publisher wants to indicate a paragraph, they can good and well create a paragraph...you know, indents and whatnot. Why on earth do otherwise???

There is a demand for the one-verse-per-line format, and apparently the NASB is only published that way now.