Another example of sloppy metadata - nullifying the dynamic use of rule-based collections

I find it difficult to believe that one of the featured elements of dynamic rule-based building of collections in LOGOS 4.x would not be a point of quality control for LOGOS before releasing new products into the marketplace. I just received an update of two volumes being added to my resource libabry in the "Opening Up" bible commentary series. They are the 31st and 32 nd resources in the series. The other 30 resources all have "Opening Up Commentary" in the Series metadata. For the two new resources, they have no entry in the Series metadata and so would never be included in the resource collection defined by this metadata. As a user I find this very frustrating that LOGOS is not doing their job on this.My trust in Logos is diminished.

ALSO, when in the Library and I type either of the following entries in the search box, I get zero (0) resources listed:

title:"Opening Up Galations"

"Opening Up Galations"

If I type title:"Opening Up" or "Opening Up", 32 resources are listed.

How does this happen that when I type a title that the resource is not listed when it exists in the Libabry?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rosie Perera

I concur about the sloppy metadata being a persistent problem. They simply don't seem to proofread the metadata before releasing products. I just filed a similar report about the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture

title:"Opening Up Galations"

"Opening Up Galations"

This is happening because you misspelled Galatians.

LimJK

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/183046#Comment_183046

On missing series metadata information.

Dennis Audet

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/183046#Comment_183046

You are correct. I was misoelling Galatians! Thanks.

Hoever, Series Metadata is missing on Acts and Galatians.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/183359#Comment_183359

You are correct. I was misoelling Galatians! Thanks.

Hoever, Series Metadata is missing on Acts and Galatians.

This is the third thread on the subject of the new releases! We are so observant, but we shouldn't have to be doing this job!

Dennis Audet

Upon checking the series metadata today, I see this error has been fixed. I can now go back to my original collection rule. Thanks LOGOS! I appreciate the follow-up.

For the Glory of God alone.

Michael McLane

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/183361#Comment_183361

This is the third thread on the subject of the new releases! We are so observant, but we shouldn't have to be doing this job!

I do not want to be perceived as being too harsh, however, the truth is, Logos leaves a great deal of support and testing to this forum (some at our request and indulgence, ie. beta program). Services it receives for free that any other company would have to deal with differently and at a cost. Meanwhile, its faithful customers pay a premium for its resources. I temper that by stating that I am a faithful customer who is heavily invested with Logos and prays they are around for a long time.

It is my opinion that this forum should not be doing the kind of support job for Logos for free that should be a part of a much better built-in help system or (dare I say) a reference manual. I know we have been over this many times, again, just my opinion.

One might easily perceive that the dedicated members of this forum are taken advantage of due to there loyalty and the giving nature afforded them by their faith. I am not saying that is an intentional action by Logos, nor am I making an accusation, but I do think we often come very close to that line.

I am not trying to raise a fuss or incite ill will, just making an objective observation based on my subjective opinion. [B]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/183766#Comment_183766

I am not trying to raise a fuss or incite ill will, just making an objective observation based on my subjective opinion.

Michael, your observations are fine. I choose not to be heavily invested with Logos resources but I do give them a lot of my time and some of my opinion! I feel that is mutually beneficial; that neither side is taking advantage of the other. I've doubled my library resources in the last 12 months with L4 but I bought them at a discount, taking advantage of the Upgrade offers when I could have paid 5 times the price for the individual resources/collections. If others choose to pay a "premium" for individual collections/resources I trust they are as satisfied as I am with the deal. I do get worried when people perceive that Logos owe them something just because they are "heavy investors", and use that fact as a weapon.

If we are loyal it is because we perceive a sense of community through our efforts for one another and that Logos provides the infrastructure to enable our contributions. If our efforts help ensure that Logos is around for a long time, I will be content.

My opinion, and I know Logos invite it, is that constructive criticism is healthy. I have to pull back at times & evaluate my position when I want to scream "get your act together" just because I can see so many deficiencies. But there are so many great people in the forum and at Logos, and we don't always agree, but we are working together to improve the product.

Michael McLane

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/184029#Comment_184029

I choose not to be heavily invested with Logos resources ... I've doubled my library resources in the last 12 months

With all due respect, Dave, in my opinion, you are "heavily" invested. One's heavily, is another's lightly. It was not my intention to throw monetary weight around, but rather, as I stated, to "temper" my perceived tone by the fact that I believe in Logos enough to be invested in them. I was simply trying to state an, hopefully, unemotional, objective observation (realizing that is impossible).

I do get worried when people perceive that Logos owe them something just because they are "heavy investors", and use that fact as a weapon.

Whether heavily invested or not, I do think Logos owes me, a costumer, something. All customers are owed a product that works. One that works as advertised, the reasons why any customer buys any product. I expect that resources will do, minimally, what Logos customers expect them to do, what Logos advertises them to do, the reasons why we are willing to pay a premium for those resources. Part of those expectations are customer support and some type of decent documentation, which was the thrust of my original statement. Granted, Logos has tremendous customer support, but is woefully lacking when it come to documentation. So much so that its customers have to create and self-maintain a wiki.

If we are loyal it is because we perceive a sense of community through our efforts for one another and that Logos provides the infrastructure to enable our contributions. If our efforts help ensure that Logos is around for a long time, I will be content.

I do enjoy the community. As was stated in another post, I feel "we have become friends". But this forum, really, should not need to be the support structure that it has become or to the degree that Logos depends on it in lieu of something more substantial and effective.

we are working together to improve the product.

That sounds good in theory and to a degree we are, but this is not a community project. This is a product produced by a not-for-profit company (at least I understand them to be a not-for-prifit entity) that charges for their wares. Hence, they have responsibilities to their customers.

I know I have only been trolling the forums for about ten months and been a logos customer for about 14 months. Maybe I do not have the insight that those of you who have been here for years have. But, maybe that also has its benefits and perspective that can add to the conversation.

My opinion, and I know Logos invite it, is that constructive criticism is healthy.

And that is all I have ever tried to do on the forums because I do believe in Logos and want it to do well as much as I want it to live up to its responsibilities to its customers in producing a great product and giving it the kinds of support that would be expected of any company.

Additionally, please do not insinuate that I would use monetary investment as a "weapon" in a discussion. It could be perceived as insulting.

[:)] <--- That is a smile. I want it to be clear that, since we are not face to face, I am engaging with all humbleness and a hand extended in friendship. Hopefully being constructive and lending some understanding to myself and my point of view. Which is not intended to be confrontational.

Fred Chapman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/184029#Comment_184029

I am not trying to raise a fuss or incite ill will, just making an objective observation based on my subjective opinion.

Michael, your observations are fine. I choose not to be heavily invested with Logos resources but I do give them a lot of my time and some of my opinion! I feel that is mutually beneficial; that neither side is taking advantage of the other. I've doubled my library resources in the last 12 months with L4 but I bought them at a discount, taking advantage of the Upgrade offers when I could have paid 5 times the price for the individual resources/collections. If others choose to pay a "premium" for individual collections/resources I trust they are as satisfied as I am with the deal. I do get worried when people perceive that Logos owe them something just because they are "heavy investors", and use that fact as a weapon.

If we are loyal it is because we perceive a sense of community through our efforts for one another and that Logos provides the infrastructure to enable our contributions. If our efforts help ensure that Logos is around for a long time, I will be content.

My opinion, and I know Logos invite it, is that constructive criticism is healthy. I have to pull back at times & evaluate my position when I want to scream "get your act together" just because I can see so many deficiencies. But there are so many great people in the forum and at Logos, and we don't always agree, but we are working together to improve the product.

Could not have said it better myself Dave. I am grateful for the opportunity we have to interact and provide feedback. I see my relationship with Logos as a customer whois trying to help a good company provide better products and services I can take advantage of.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/184055#Comment_184055

That sounds good in theory and to a degree we are, but this is not a community project. This is a product produced by a not-for-profit company (at least I understand them to be a not-for-prifit entity) that charges for their wares. Hence, they have responsibilities to their customers.

Logos is not a non-for-profit entity. It is a privately held corporation with shareholders. They have a responsibility to many constituents: their employees, their customers, their publishing partners, their investors. And to God above all. But they are run as a business, so they do need to make a profit, to pour those profits back into improving the product and finally paying back the investors for their patience while the company was struggling to make ends meet.

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/184055#Comment_184055

I know I have only been trolling the forums for about ten months and been a logos customer for about 14 months

Michael

I just wanted to note that "trolling" usually has a negative connotation on web-based forums. From the fishing practice of dragging a baited hook behind a boat (trolling), the concept developed of a person posting baited comments in an effort to provoke controversy.

Please note that I am not accusing you of this practice. I am just defining the term you used as it is commonly perceived in online conversations.

since we are not face to face

That is the thing that makes online conversations touchy at times. It is so easy to misunderstand another person's intentions.

As Dave said "healthy criticism is healthy", so feel free.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/184055#Comment_184055

It was not my intention to throw monetary weight around, but rather, as I stated, to "temper" my perceived tone by the fact that I believe in Logos enough to be invested in them. I was simply trying to state an, hopefully, unemotional, objective observation (realizing that is impossible).

I was looking at both ends of the monetary scale, but not because of anything you had said.

Whether heavily invested or not, I do think Logos owes me, a costumer, something. ....

Part of those expectations are customer support and some type of decent documentation, which was the thrust of my original statement. Granted, Logos has tremendous customer support, but is woefully lacking when it come to documentation. So much so that its customers have to create and self-maintain a wiki.

My experience embraces a similar expectation but with a decision as to what I want to do about those deficiencies.

Additionally, please do not insinuate that I would use monetary investment as a "weapon" in a discussion. It could be perceived as insulting.

There was no personal insinuation. I put that as a fact about some other people!