I am not sure this is the right thread for this observation, but I am sure someone can point out where I should have posted it, if it is not.
I suspect that I am like many people who muddle through a little Greek to be able to make use of Logos resources which work with the Greek language, but have never had to master the critical apparatus ... especially as it seems so cryptic ... having to be squeezed into a small space at the bottom of the page ... and because there are so many manuscripts that only someone who steeps themselves in textual criticism have any hope of remembering which funny symbol means which text, and what the significance of that given text is, anyway.
It seems to me that Logos is ideally placed to produce a "textual critical" report of any selected verse or paragraph ... where the textual variants are spelt out in full, and our commentaries are mined for pertinent textual critical arguments ... and there is a nice graphic tree (or something) which situates the various variants in the different textual families, and which spells out which kinds of mistakes are most common in that text, e.t.c. This could really open up the whole mysterious field of textual criticism to a wider range of Bible users, and help put Logos right at the forefront of textual criticism ... and probably in the long term, free it from being a slave to the textual apparatus of the NA.
Who thinks something like this is a next logical step for Logos to pursue, given how they have supported original language work in the past?
