Inconsitent tagging

I've been working on constructing a PB with an index of articles and reviews in the Journal of Hebrew Scriptures. In the process I've discovered that the tagging of the volumes is highly inconsistent. For example

Volume 3

[[Martin Hengel and C. K. Barrett, Conflicts and Challenges in Early Christianity >> logosres:jhs03;art=art11.5]]

Voume 4

[[Volkmar Fritz, 1 & 2 Kings >> logosres:jhs04;art=rev.102]]

Volume 5

[[Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 5, Article 20, page 102 >> logosres:jhs05;ref=JHS.JHS_5,_art._20,_p._102;off=575209]]

Volume 8

[[How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature—Why Modern Readers Need to Know the Difference and What It Means for Faith Today >> logosres:jhs08;ref=biblio.at$3DSteven$2520L.$2520McKenzie,$2520How$2520to$2520Read$2520the$2520Bible:$2520History,$2520Prophecy,$2520Literature$E2$80$94Why$2520Modern$2520Readers$2520Need$2520to$2520Know$2520the$2520Difference$2520and$2520What$2520It$2520Means$2520for$2520Faith$2520Today$7Cau$3DIrwin,$2520Brian$2520P.]]

Some are fairly short while others are outlandishly long (#8). #s 3 & 4 seem to be of a good length while #5 fails to note the name of the article/review to which it links. The method used in #8 is excessively long and surely doesn't have any need to be thus prolix. I would suggest that all links be standardized to conform to the examples #3 and #4 where the length is not excessive but which provides the necessary references to be human readable without a score-card.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

Some are fairly short while others are outlandishly long (#8).

I don't have the JHS but did you select the same Active reference for #5 and #8 (if there was a choice) as the others?

#5 fails to note the name of the article/review to which it links.

Doesn't ref=JHS.JHS_5,_art._20,_p._102 convey that information i.e. journal 5, article 20? Does the Active reference have an alternative with the name (not number)?

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/278789#Comment_278789

Some are fairly short while others are outlandishly long (#8).

I don't have the JHS but did you select the same Active reference for #5 and #8 (if there was a choice) as the others?

#5 fails to note the name of the article/review to which it links.

Doesn't ref=JHS.JHS_5,_art._20,_p._102 convey that information i.e. journal 5, article 20? Does the Active reference have an alternative with the name (not number)?

No, it doesn't convey the information needed such as [[Bob Pritchett, Fire Someone Today…]]. I don't enjoy having to go in to enter that information for each link. Remember, that part is what is displayed so how would "JHS 5, article 20" tell the reader anything?

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/278793#Comment_278793

I wasn't sure whether you objected to the link or its (visible) label. Where possible you should avoid page references e.g. where an article on John 4:2 shows p. 132 as the active reference clicking in that box may also show John 4:2 and that should be selected before you copy the location.

That said, the label is auto-generated from the link/reference so cannot be any more meaningful. Even if it was John 4:2 it wouldn't necessarily be the label I prefer.