Announcement: Resource Type Change--Dictionary, Encyclopedia, Lexicon
Comments
-
Dave, William, fgh:
We'll have to look closer at all of these, but my initial guess is that some (or all) of the cases you mention are simply mis-classified.
fgh said:
I would also appreciate if dictionaries, lexicons, grammars, and the like, were listed as lang:greek/hebrew/etc, and not just English. Title:greek will never find a Greek/Swedish lexicon, if there ever is one; lang:greek would. And it catches stuff like the TDNT, which doesn't have the word 'Greek' in the title.
Torrey is listed as both 'R.A.', and 'R. A.' Tischendorf is listed as both 'Constantin von' and 'Constantinus'. And, unless you've already fixed it, some guy I can't now remember is listed as both 'F.A' and 'F.A.'.
Browne, author of The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, seems to have no first name.We use the Language field for the language the resource is in rather than the language the resource covers. You should be able to find all Greek lexicons with "type:lexicon subject:Greek language". We made sure that all Lexicons have an appropriate subject of this form, but I'll put a review of the subjects for Grammars on our to do list.
We also already have some standardization and clean up in the works for Author and Publisher fields, but, as Rosie mentions, the best thing is to make sure these get posted on http://wiki.logos.com/Metadata_correction_proposals.
0 -
Louis St. Hilaire said:
You should be able to find all Greek lexicons with "type:lexicon subject:Greek language". We made sure that all Lexicons have an appropriate subject of this form, but I'll put a review of the subjects for Grammars on our to do list.
Thanks for doing this and it would be great to see it done for grammars. I too found the Language field a little unhelpful, thanks for explaining why it is, the way it is, rather than what I would have expected.
0 -
Are these changes for Mac too? I haven't noticed a difference in my library.
In HIS Eternal Service,
Tom Castle
**If we will do God's work, in God's way, at God's time, with God's power, we shall have God's blessings!!**0 -
Exhaustive Dictionary of Biblical Names doesn't cover a significant portion of a language's vocabulary, so Encylopedia seems more appropriate, even though the entries are short.
Topically organized works like Dictionaries of Quotations, or Topical Bibles are definately more Encylopedia than Dictionary/Lexicon as those terms were defined above, but aren't really what we think of when we think of Encylopedia, as each entry is actually an anthology rather than an original essay on the headword. But is it really worth splitting distinctions to create a separate category for them?
I would be inclined to lump them under Encylopedia. I definately don't think Monograph is appropriate. I'd rather go ahead and have a "Topical Anthology" category instead of that.
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
Exhaustive Dictionary of Biblical Names doesn't cover a significant portion of a language's vocabulary, so Encylopedia seems more appropriate, even though the entries are short.
I would put these as dictionaries although I see your point ... but I do distinguish between language dictionaries and Bible dictionaries.
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 think M.J.'s comment demonstrates why the Logos defined categories have never been particularly useful. What makes sense for one person, doesn't for another (not to mention the feelings of those of us who consider classifying the Book of Enoch as Bible to be down right dangerous and heretical). And if the (lack of) logic of the categories isn't maddening enough, the fact that they are always changing doesn't help.
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
us who consider classifying the Book of Enoch as Bible to be down right dangerous and heretical)
or respectful [;)]
But I agree that users do have different opinions. From my perspective when we get beyond the Bible where I consider respect and verse reference/mapping to be paramount, the main thing I want is consistency.
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 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
And if the (lack of) logic of the categories isn't maddening enough, the fact that they are always changing doesn't help.
Agreed. I still haven't gotten through reviewing all my collection definitions to see which ones of them I should change to include Encyclopedia as a type, or whatever. I think this is one of the reasons why they are loathe to make metadata changes involving Type very often (apart from the fact that it also involves changes in the code usually). But I hope they've finally figured everything out once and for all.
0 -
0
-
I really support these changes, though I'm disappointed they weren't publicised more clearly. I was away on holiday when this was announced, and spent ages trying to work out why large chunks of my collections weren't working properly any more. In my opinion this change should have been notified at least on the blog, and preferably also through the "My Messages" feature in Logos, to make sure everyone knew.
Messing with metadata affects user-created content, so I think Logos should be careful in making changes. (Perhaps the ideal would be a message that said when books have moved in/out of collections due to a metadata change.)
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Here's another 'edge-case', the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. It's classified as an encyclopaedia, but although it's arranged first by English themes, all the main indexing is by Greek headwords. So it should be a lexicon in my view.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Louis St. Hilaire said:
You should be able to find all Greek lexicons with "type:lexicon subject:Greek language"
This syntax is slightly incorrect. It should be type:lexicon subject:"Greek language" (note the quotes).
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
This syntax is slightly incorrect. It should be type:lexicon subject:"Greek language" (note the quotes).
There is going to be an lot of confusion over the language of a resource for classification purposes. For example:
- with lexicons you must use subject:greek because they are all lang:English and the same lexicon* could also have subject:hebrew (it isn't essential to use subject:"Greek language").
- with bibles you can use lang:English or subject:English, except that some bibles** are missing the Subject information and it is more accurate to use lang:English or lang:Greek.
* some lexicons could be missing subject:Aramaic when they definitely cover Hebrew. The Abridged and Enhanced BDB could be some of those?
** I've added the needed corrections to the wiki
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
I do consider the book of enoch as canonical as does the Ethiopian church, but lets remember the Bible being in the hands of the people was once considered heretical too. They wont understand it or be able to interpret it aright! That was the argument. Maybe they'll take it all as being true because they are not trained clergy. No, let's keep it as a bible.
0 -
Ace Hedger said:
I do consider the book of enoch as canonical as does the Ethiopian church, but lets remember the Bible being in the hands of the people was once considered heretical too. They wont understand it or be able to interpret it aright! That was the argument. Maybe they'll take it all as being true because they are not trained clergy. No, let's keep it as a bible.
Ace,
Welcome to the Forums!
I noticed that you had commented about The Book of Enoch in a thread with that title. That's the best place to discuss it. This thread was started to discuss another topic. The purpose of the Logos Forums is to discuss how to use Logos Bible Software to better study the Bible and related texts. Since you have an interest in The Book of Enoch you can find helpful resources on it in Logos. Do you have a Logos base package. If you do let us know on the first thread you posted on what books you own. That way forum members might be able to help. Logos Bible Software is actually designed to help people from all walks of life to study the Bible for themselves.
Blessings in your studies!
0
