Prioritizing and 'starring'

I understand the concepts of prioritising and starring, but it seems to be that these two functions are semantically almost identical. A 5-star resource is surely to be prioritised above a 1-star resource.

Can I make a request for:

(Optionally) syncing stars and priorities. I have in mind some horiztonal bars in the prioritising dialogue box. Drag something above the 5-star line to indicate it's priority and star it.
Adding an option to hide resources below a certain star-rating. I can imagine most of the time not wanting to both with 'poor' resources, but occasionally needing to add them in. This could be achieved through being able to hide resources in a collection, of course.
Allowing us to filter by datatype and/or collections when prioritising resources. With a large library (mine is 3,587) it's almost impossible to make sense of the priority list. But if I could filter by commentaries or dictionaries, etc. it would make my life much easier.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Damian McGrath

Allowing us to filter by datatype and/or collections when prioritising resources. With a large library (mine is 3,587) it's almost impossible to make sense of the priority list. But if I could filter by commentaries or dictionaries, etc. it would make my life much easier.

I agree with this one.

My priority list is a mess....

Robert Pavich

A 5-star resource is surely to be prioritised above a 1-star resource.

I thought that the "stars" was just a personal preference thing and not a program thing..."I like this..I'm giving it 5 starts" and then you could search just your "5 star" items...

Am I wrong?

Russ Quinn

I thought that the "stars" was just a personal preference thing and not a program thing..."I like this..I'm giving it 5 starts" and then you could search just your "5 star" items...

Am I wrong?

No, you are right. That is the problem that Mark is identifying.

I agree with him that large libraries would be more manageable if the star system affected prioritization.

I also find the prioritization list a bit cumbersome.

Mark Barnes

I thought that the "stars" was just a personal preference thing and not a program thing...

It is, but my point is that it shouldn't be. If I prefer something, surely that means it ought to be a priority. If I like a resource, why should I have to star it and prioritize it?

Damian McGrath

I thought that the "stars" was just a personal preference thing and not a program thing...

It is, but my point is that it shouldn't be. If I prefer something, surely that means it ought to be a priority. If I like a resource, why should I have to star it and prioritize it?

But, if I give a particular issue of Christian History magazine 4 stars that does not mean that I wish to use it in passage guides (an absurd example I know).

My understanding is that starring, together with tags, and corrected metadata will help me to find items in my library. This is a different function from preferring resources for the use of guides.

Bohuslav Wojnar

My understanding is that starring, together with tags, and corrected metadata will help me to find items in my library. This is a different function from preferring resources for the use of guides.

I agree on this with Damian.

spitzerpl

I agree with this one.

My priority list is a mess....

Yes. and color code the resources in the list according to type.

Chris Elford

Yes. and color code the resources in the list according to type.

According to the colors on your belly? Red, Yellow, Green - sounds like a stop light!

Chris

spitzerpl

According to the colors on your belly? Red, Yellow, Green - sounds like a stop light!

Just trying to make Logos Happier....shall we SING!!!

Dave Hooton

1. (Optionally) syncing stars and priorities. I have in mind some horiztonal bars in the prioritising dialogue box. Drag something above the 5-star line to indicate it's priority and star it.

Any programmed use of stars lies within each resource category as opposed to the whole list eg.

5 x English bibles

5 x English dictionaries

5 x Greek Lexicons

5 x Hebrew Lexicons

5 x Greek Bibles

5 x Hebrew Bibles

(optional) x Commentaries

etc.

Any 5-star line would exist within each of the above categories, so when I Add a 4-star English dictionary L4 would position it near the top of the English dictionaries I have in the list! Note that I have already rated the resource before adding to the list.

2. Adding an option to hide resources below a certain star-rating. I can imagine most of the time not wanting to both with 'poor' resources, but occasionally needing to add them in. This could be achieved through being able to hide resources in a collection, of course.

The dynamic feature of Collections is better suited to any transient regard for a resource! If you don't like it nuke it (sorry, hide it).

3. Allowing us to filter by datatype and/or collections when prioritising resources. With a large library (mine is 3,587) it's almost impossible to make sense of the priority list. But if I could filter by commentaries or dictionaries, etc. it would make my life much easier.

See my model of a Prioritize list above. When several resources cater for the same data type (eg. Greek Strong's) then you have to use the Advanced features to restrict a higher priority lexicon from "stealing" Strong's numbers away from Strong's lexicon eg.

DBL Greek [restrict to Greek data type so it does not get used for Strong's]

ANLEX

Louw-Nida

Enhanced Strong's Lexicon [this can handle Greek words but I want it primarily for Strong's]

It's possible to construct an efficient list (mine has 2 restricted resources), but it is only by trial and error that you finally get the resources to do what you want with the data types. But L3 is much more tailorable with its focus on data types.

Damian McGrath

But L3 is much more tailorable with its focus on data types.

Amen.

Can we please see a return to this level of user control?

Todd Anson Wilkins

But L3 is much more tailorable with its focus on data types.

Amen.

Can we please see a return to this level of user control?

YES PLEASE! I beg, implore, and earnestly seek
more control with data types and resources!

David A Egolf

Robert, et. al,

This thread was from last November. (I'm currently trying to catch up.)

Are stars still distinct from "priority"? I hope so!

I have started to use stars to indicate sources with which I have spent some time and personally prefer based on prior experience.

On the other hand, I was using priority to indicate "best of breed" based on trust in the author and the opinion of others.

I can't tell if my technique is getting me what I want, but if they merge the semantics of stars and priorities they will certainly reduce my degrees of freedom.

-- David

TCBlack

Are stars still distinct from "priority"? I hope so!

Yes indeed they are.

I can't tell if my technique is getting me what I want, but if they merge the semantics of stars and priorities they will certainly reduce my degrees of freedom.

Not to worry, that's not even an idea in the mix AFAIK.

David A Egolf

Thank you for your quick reply.

To further explain my technique, I happen to really like J. Vernon McGee. Thus, I have his commentary with lots of stars in order to grab my attention should he show up in a list. On the other hand, his approach is homolitic and I usually prefer to use more analytical resources for deep study.

Can someone suggest an alternate, perhaps better, use of the stars?