Logos Please Tag the Classic Commentary Collections you are selling!!!!

I was able to buy up the Classic Commentaries and Studies on Genesis Collection (22 Vols) when it was on community pricing. I went to try to set up a collection for this group of resources and there is no tagging whatsoever. My idea was, particularly as there are a number of 'Classic Collections' coming out that I would like a collection of classic resources that I can search on or use the cited by tool... otherwise this stuff just pops up intermixed with stuff during searches.

Problem is, there is nothing in the tagging or common about the titles that I see that I can set a rule by for this collection. I can of course find each resource and tag them individually, but as this was sold as a collection, it would be nice if there was at least something done as part of the production of the series.

So I am going to go through and edit the short title as CCAS-Gen and also tag this and all upcoming CPs as CCAS so that I can group them. I know this is something users can do, but as these and a ton of these other collections are coming out, so could Logos consider something like this as default meta-tagging or grouping these collections together?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

there is no tagging whatsoever.

Nothing for Type, Languages, Author, Subjects? [:D]

there is nothing in the tagging or common about the titles that I see that I can set a rule by for this collection.

You'd expect that for individual titles from as many different publishers; which is mainly why it is not a Series. The other part has to do with the indexing, if any as they need a common index e.g. Bible.

edit the short title as CCAS-Gen and also tag this and all upcoming CPs as CCAS so that I can group them.

The short title should reflect the title else you will get confused in resource lists/dropdowns. It is best to tag (Mytag) them as CCAS-Gen:

mytag:CCAS will find all titles
mytag:CCAS-Gen will find the Genesis titles

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312111#Comment_312111

Nothing for Type, Languages, Author, Subjects?

OK fair point. The effect didn't carry through as I hoped.

You'd expect that for individual titles from as many different publishers; which is mainly why it is not a Series. The other part has to do with the indexing, if any as they need a common index e.g. Bible.

I agree, however, what's the harm in the 'Series' field of putting the Classic Commentaries and Studies on Genesis? Especially in our growing libraries, this helps us group together mentally where materials came from. The cover graphics are already the same. I appreciate that the bundle is a collection of monographs, commentaries and even Bibles, but the beauty of technology is to be able to tag resources in multiple ways to allow you to look at resources from multiple angles. My suggestion was particularly with so many of these collections in the pipeline, it would help users manage these if there was some additional tagging to assist.

Regardless, if I am the only one in the Logos universe that feels this way, the beauty of mytags is that if you are willing to invest the time you can do this yourself. I looked up each resource and I actually did tag them pretty much the way you suggested. So our minds were thinking alike! [8-|]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312196#Comment_312196

I agree, however, what's the harm in the 'Series' field of putting the Classic Commentaries and Studies on Genesis? Especially in our growing libraries, this helps us group together mentally where materials came from.

I just saw that D G Lindsay's 10 books on Creation/Evolution, all monographs with no index, have a Series name. I had already tagged them as Creation but there are another five, mostly by Hugh Ross without a Series tag. Then there's 7 volumes of "Words of Light and Life" without a Series tag. The best you can do is update the wiki Metadata Proposals with your suggestion.

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312288#Comment_312288

I submitted a suggestion... we'll see if it helps!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312196#Comment_312196

what's the harm in the 'Series' field of putting the Classic Commentaries and Studies on Genesis?

Any analyst would cringe at the suggestion of using a single field to mean two different things. You are asking for a bundle field - something that I would support despite the complication that a single resource can be in multiple bundles. However, a bundle like the CCS-Gn contains series/multi-volume works which I would not like to see replaced by the bundle name:

2 volumes by Candlish
2 volumes by Driver
2 volumes by Wright
2 volumes by Alford
2 volumes by Dillman

To me it is far more important to get multi-volume works marked as series than to have bundles identified. I do, however, create collections for the bundles which I find quicker to do manually rather than create a tag and collection rule.

Donovan R. Palmer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312358#Comment_312358

Interesting thoughts. I would also suggest any analyst would like to see some additional order brought to this regardless of the strategy. Sure you can spend hours tagging your libraries (which I am doing more and more - and so are others that I correspond with) but is that the best way?

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312366#Comment_312366

Interesting thoughts. I would also suggest any analyst would like to see some additional order brought to this regardless of the strategy. Sure you can spend hours tagging your libraries (which I am doing more and more - and so are others that I correspond with) but is that the best way?

I'd say yes given what we have available to use for metadata fields. It's easy to do--just sort the library by last updated and select all the volumes received at the same time when you get a commentary collection download, then add your tag.

I feel the series field should not be used for collection labels such as this. These collections are not series, but rather they are arbitrary groups of resources where each title is only related to the others by subject matter. The only reason they are together is for marketing purposes. It seems to me that the series label should be reserved for a series of works that together make up one work or are published under a common title. This would be especially true if one of these collections had within it a multivolume work that needed its own series tag.. That would get an "real" series tag, and the others would get the collection tag?

Personally, I don't want my books categorized by how I bought them. That is why the mytag value is so nice. We can tag them differently. What might be nice is if these collections came with their own set of "mytags" indicating which collection they were bought with. I could live with that (Logos needs to make changing and deleting multiple tags possible, though).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312366#Comment_312366

Interesting thoughts. I would also suggest any analyst would like to see some additional order brought to this regardless of the strategy.

Applying multiple meanings to a single field brings disorder. What we need is more order and more accuracy/consistency on the part of Logos. If I were making a proposal to Logos, I would suggest that series and bundles come with pre-set collections that the user can activate or delete. Since it takes < 2 minutes to create a collection for a new bundle (after you have sorted into date order), I can't give bundle tagging high priority even though it would be nice to have. I would get a bit irate if Logos used the series field for the bundle rather than using it for the missing series information - which is a bigger problem for me.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312377#Comment_312377

then add your tag.

Since the bundle is not dynamic, one can simply drag-and-drop into the collection; no need for a mytag step

especially true if one of these collections had within it a multivolume work

which the Genesis set does

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312395#Comment_312395

then add your tag.

Since the bundle is not dynamic, one can simply drag-and-drop into the collection; no need for a mytag step

Tagging is useful to view the collection in the library window, since collections can't be used to filter the library. (I wish they could)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312421#Comment_312421

Tagging is useful to view the collection in the library window

Quite true.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/312421#Comment_312421

Tagging is useful to view the collection in the library window, since collections can't be used to filter the library. (I wish they could)

Yes! [Y] [Y] [Y]