Number of Links from JBL Collection?

Ted Weis

While looking today at BDAG, I noticed a reference to a journal article, which made me wonder...

The prepub for the Talmud says it will link more resources than any other set produced. Great.

But does anyone have any idea how many links will be created to BDAG from the Journal of Biblical Literature 26 volume set?

What other "linked to" resources would make the JBL collection more valuable to you?

Mark Barnes

The stated intention from Bob is that "with very few exceptions, we intend to create every possible link to existing resources when we publish a new resource."

fgh

Ted Weis said:

The prepub for the Talmud says it will link more resources than any other set produced. Great.

From what I see it only says that it "will provide the opportunity to link more references than almost any other set of books we haven’t yet produced."

I suspect we'll have to wait several years for most of those links to actually show up. So don't get your hopes up too high...

(But, please, Logos, feel free to tell me I'm wrong! [:D])

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214414#Comment_214414

Yes, I noticed the word 'opportunity' too. But because the Talmud builds on the Mishnah, any links to the Mishnah will also link to the Talmud, so they've got a flying start.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214434#Comment_214434

Mark Barnes said:

Yes, I noticed the word 'opportunity' too. But because the Talmud builds on the Mishnah, any links to the Mishnah will also link to the Talmud, so they've got a flying start.

As I understand it, the Talmud is made as a separate resource from the Mishna, so, presumably, that would only work if you already had the Mishna open and linked to the Talmud. If not, only the Mishna would open. Unless I've misunderstood things.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214518#Comment_214518

fgh said:

As I understand it, the Talmud is made as a separate resource from the Mishna, so, presumably, that would only work if you already had the Mishna open and linked to the Talmud. If not, only the Mishna would open. Unless I've misunderstood things.

It is a separate resource, but existing links to the Mishnah are not technically links, but references (see an explanation of the difference here). So that should mean that links to the Mishnah would open either the Mishnah or the Talmud, whichever is more highly prioritised.

<edit>That's my understanding based on the product description, by the way. I could be wrong. But it's consistent, for example, with references to the pseudepigrapha. References to the pseudepigraph will open up whichever resource using that reference system is most highly prioritised, whether that be a commentary, a translation, or an original text. Even Bible references work that way. If you prioritise a commentary above your Bibles, then the commentary, not a Bible will open when you click a Bible reference).</edit>

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214538#Comment_214538

Incidentally, if you want to find out how many references you have to the Mishnah in your library already (and therefore the minimum number to the Talmuds), then the search criteria is <Mishnah ~ m. Zera'im - m. Toharot>. I have 27,718!

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214541#Comment_214541

Mark Barnes said:

Incidentally, if you want to find out how many references you have to the Mishnah in your library already (and therefore the minimum number to the Talmuds), then the search criteria is <Mishnah ~ m. Zera'im - m. Toharot>. I have 27,718!

Very clever, Mark!  *smile*

Peace to you!                   And!              Joy in the Lord!

I would never, ever have figured out that search!                Thank you very much!

Also for making it easy for me to search by pushing just a couple of buttons.  *smile*          I have 24,836, beyond what I ever imagined!

 

Stephen Paynter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214541#Comment_214541

Mark Barnes said:

the search criteria is <Mishnah ~ m. Zera'im - m. Toharot>.

I thought I understood the search syntax but I don't understand this at all. Is there somewhere I could look to understand this syntax, or could you briefly explain it?

 

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214750#Comment_214750

Stephen Edward Paynter said:

Mark Barnes said:

the search criteria is <Mishnah ~ m. Zera'im - m. Toharot>.

I thought I understood the search syntax but I don't understand this at all. Is there somewhere I could look to understand this syntax, or could you briefly explain it?

<Mishnah ~ m. Zera'im - m. Toharot> is directly equivalent to <bible ~ Gen - Rev>.

The angle brackets < and > indicate we're searching for a reference type, and Mishnah is the name of the reference type.

The tilde (~) means 'any intersection', and means any reference that covers all or part of the search range should be included. It's the most inclusive way of searching, which is what we want for this search. Choosing '=' would mean that we would only find references that were explicitly m. Zera'im - m. Toharot, which is not what we want.

So now to the references themselves. m.Zera'im is the name of the first division of the Mishnah in Logos, m.Toharot the name of the last division. Whereas the Bible is structured like this:

• Genesis
  • Chapter 1
    • Verse 1

The mishnah is structured like this:

• Zera'im (first division)
  • Berakhot (this level is known as a 'tractate')
    • Chapter 1
      • Mishnah 1
        • Statement A (this level is not in all translations)

So, to search for all references to a resource, you just need to know the first and last reference. You can use any level. So you could do Gen - Rev, Gen 1 - Rev 22, or Gen 1:1 - Rev 22:21. So I chose m. Zera'im - m. Toharot, though I could have chosen <Mishnah ~ m. Berakot - m. 'Uq.>. (tractate level), or something even more detailed instead.

If you're wondering how I knew Logos' name for the references, that's found fairly easily. It just opened the Mishnah, clicked on 'First Division' in the TOC, then right clicked in the text. The name of the reference is given in the right-click menu. If I want to be able to copy and paste it, I can just search for it in the library, then copy and paste it.

There's more info on searching for references here: http://wiki.logos.com/Detailed_Search_Help#Searching_for_Bible_Verses_and_other_References

The strategy works exactly the same for any other reference type (except for the DSS, which has been broken for a long time).

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214538#Comment_214538

Mark Barnes said:

So that should mean that links to the Mishnah would open either the Mishnah or the Talmud, whichever is more highly prioritised.

<edit>That's my understanding based on the product description, by the way. I could be wrong. But it's consistent, for example, with references to the pseudepigrapha.

Yeah, but the Pseudepigrapha all have [more or less] the same text, whether it be in the original or a translation. The Mishna and the Talmud does not have the same text, at least not in this version (as I understand it), where, like I said, they are made into two separate resources (normally the Mishna would be a part of the Talmud). In other words, it's more like the kind of commentary which first gives the Bible text v1-7, then makes textual comments on v 1-7, then covers background issues for v 1-7, and then, finally, gives an interpretation of v 1-7, before it moves on to v8-18. And you wouldn't want a link about a grammatical issue in v2 to turn up some background issue in v2 instead, if it was possible to prioritize that above, and you had!

So it seems to me that a link will either refer to a particular piece of text (the source of a quote, e g), in which case that text will be found either in the Mishna or in the Talmud, and bringing up the wrong one will be absolutely useless. Or it will refer to what both the Mishna and the Talmud has to say on the matter, in which case bringing up only one will be almost equally useless. 

But, then again, I may have misunderstood things.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/214952#Comment_214952

fgh said:

Yeah, but the Pseudepigrapha all have [more or less] the same text, whether it be in the original or a translation.

In my earlier example I also stated that if you prioritise a Bible Commentary above a Bible, then a Bible Commentary will open when you click on a Bible link. That's directly parallel to the Mishnah/Talmud relationship. The point is not that the Mishnah and Talmud have the same text, but that they have the same referencing system. It's then up to you how you prioritise. I'm sure most users will prioritise Mishnah above Talmud, but for users without the Mishnah, and for those studying the Talmud, then it would make sense to prioritise the other way.

If the 'wrong' one comes up, then pressing the right arrow key, or using the parallel resource menu will bring up the other one (another benefit of having the same reference type).