BUG 5.1 RC1: No cross references in paged view

fgh

Why don't the cross references show up at the bottom of the page, like the footnotes do?

It doesn't seem to be a resource issue, since none of the 4-5 Bibles I checked showed them.

Even worse: NABRE shows neither the footnotes, nor the cross references.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Alan Palmer (Logos)

It doesn't seem to be a resource issue, since none of the 4-5 Bibles I checked showed them.

You're right. It is not a resource issue in this case. (see below)

Why don't the cross references show up at the bottom of the page, like the footnotes do?

This concept was evaluated when footnotes were first supported, however the frequency of cross references in many popular bibles created less-than-readable page layouts (due to bible content to footnote content ratio and resulting page whitespace). It also looked unnatural given the way those bibles handle cross references in print (often in a margin).

There is a case already in our system to re-evaluate this decision and improve the footnote layout to better accommodate cross references. No news on if/when that will happen.

Even worse: NABRE shows neither the footnotes, nor the cross references.

This is a resource issue. The footnote references do not conform to the criteria for on-page footnotes. Specifically, the system expects footnote references to be superscript and not marked as a cross reference or an abbreviation. The system also limits the number of occurrences of a specific footnote to one per referring article.

NABRE uses a non-superscript "*" to indicate footnotes. I will create a case for this resource.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/498697#Comment_498697

Why don't the cross references show up at the bottom of the page, like the footnotes do?

This concept was evaluated when footnotes were first supported, however the frequency of cross references in many popular bibles created less-than-readable page layouts (due to bible content to footnote content ratio and resulting page whitespace). It also looked unnatural given the way those bibles handle cross references in print (often in a margin).

There is a case already in our system to re-evaluate this decision and improve the footnote layout to better accommodate cross references. No news on if/when that will happen.

I think it would be cool if the cross references could be displayed in a column next to the text like print bibles do. A multiple selection switch (off, bottom, left column, right column) for cross reference display would be nice so that we can change the layout depending on the window size and shape.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/498697#Comment_498697

I will create a case for this resource.

Thanks.

This concept was evaluated when footnotes were first supported, however the frequency of cross references in many popular bibles created less-than-readable page layouts

You mean like this[:)]:

IOW, that problem exists with footnotes as well, and probably even more so. Can you really find a Bible that has more cross references than NET has footnotes?[^o)]

And as for "less-than-readable page layouts": take a look at BUG 5.1 RC1: Layout in paged view.[:S]

Also: maybe there are exceptions, but all the Bibles I looked at yesterday were heavy either on footnotes, or on cross references. Never both.

It also looked unnatural given the way those bibles handle cross references in print (often in a margin).

That must be an English or American thing. I'm used to Bibles looking like this:

Or this:

There is a case already in our system to re-evaluate this decision and improve the footnote layout to better accommodate cross references.

[Y]