Scholar
Disclaimer: I don’t work for Logos, and this is not an official product announcement from Logos Bible Software nor even something in the works from Logos Bible Software. This is purely a figment of my imagination, albeit one I’d love to see Logos make happen.
Up through Logos 3, Logos has been a personal research assistant allowing users to take their Bible study to entirely new levels by simply entering a passage and clicking Go!.
In Logos 4, Logos brought the personal research assistant everywhere we go: on our desktop, on our phone, on our tablet, etc.
In Logos 5, Logos went a step farther bringing in a personal research team of Bible Scholars to labor over the Word and bring us connections in the Word of God that can only be done through human research, not mere computer algorithms.
Now I think it’s time for Logos to take Bible Study to an entirely new level.
Wouldn’t it be great if not only you could have your own personal research assistant with you everywhere you go, but wouldn’t it be even greater if you could have a personal Bible scholar with you everywhere you go. You could ask this Bible scholar anything, from simple weights and measures calculations to deep theological questions, and get answers to all your Biblical questions right at your fingertips from your own personal Logos Library.
That’s the idea behind Scholar. Scholar would be the world’s first personal digital Bible scholar that goes with you wherever you go.
Short description, It’s like Siri for Bible Software.
Now for the long description…
We all have Biblical questions from simple things such as “How many miles are in a day’s journey?” or “How many times in my preferred Bible is the term ‘faith’ mentioned?” or deeper questions like “How many times is the Greek word for ‘love’ mentioned in the New Testament?” or “How far is it from Jerusalem to Damascus?” or theological questions like “When is Jesus coming back?” or questions like “What evidences are there that God exists?” or “Is there evidence for Creation?”
Scholar would answer all of these questions, but do so by not merely acting as a glorified search engine on the web. Scholar would mine users personal Logos libraries for rich Biblical content, then display the content in a manner that’s presentable and understandable to the average end user. Most typical Christians may have no idea what Theology, Eschatology, Apologetics, Premillenialism, Posttribulationism, etc., mean, but Scholar would present the rich material in such a way that typical average Christian end users could ask Scholar their toughest Biblical questions and get answers to those questions from their own personal Logos libraries, connecting them to this rich and vast information like never before.
Here’s how it’d work. A Logos user would ask Scholar a Bible question. This could be done in one of two ways: typing in the question (aka how one does on Wolfram Alpha) or using their voice (aka Siri). Logos could license the voice recognition technologies from Dragon to make this happen. Most end users would probably use voice recognition.
This would then connect the Logos user to Scholar running in the cloud (Scholar would probably need to be run in the cloud right now in order to scale everywhere). Scholar would take text from either what the end user typed into Scholar or the text transcription from Dragon voice recognition and pass it into the search engine. This could possibly be done with IBM’s DeepQA (aka WATSON, which now runs in the cloud) or a similar alternative.
From there, the QA engine powering Scholar would determine which type of search is being performed and pass off the search to the proper databases to search. For simple stuff such as weights/measures, etc., it would push the search off into a customized version of Mathematica (the same engine that powers Wolfram Alpha) running in the Logos cloud that would be geared toward Biblical weights/measures. It’d perform the calculation and push the results back down to Logos users quickly.
For slightly more complex searches requiring hits (such as searching one’s preferred Bible for all instances of “faith” or searching one’s entire library for all instances of the topic “cross”), Scholar would run Bible searches in the Logos cloud, present the results back to users inline within Scholar, with links taking them to the books or the actual searches inside Logos. Scholar could perform all the searches we do today (basic, Bible, morph, syntax, etc.).
For deeper questions (Theological questions, etc.), Scholar would perform the complex searches on one’s own personal Logos Library in the Logos cloud, pull top articles from the books, display the content of them inline inside Scholar, as well as link to additional material related to the question (books, Logos datasets, personal user files, etc.), and link to additional books in the Logos and Vyrso bookstore that touch on the question, as well as link to thousands of online articles from selected Christian Websites chosen by Logos. Scholar could also use text to speech using AT&T Natural Voices to read off content to users.
Here’s how it’d work. For example, if I asked Scholar a question like “When is Jesus coming back?”, such a question opens up quite a bit of a Theological debate. In order for Scholar to remain “unbiased”, Scholar would search through a range of Theology books, etc. in one’s personal Logos Library, and present articles comparing/contrasting the various Millenial and Tribulational views, presenting the text of those articles in line and in a clear, understandable format to end users. Users would then be able to mine the articles for themselves, study them in light with what the Word of God says, and walk away with a solid Theological answer based on their research. Scholar would be able to get users into these complex resources, reading and studying the content from themselves in line with the Word of God, and walking away knowing where they stand with what they believe the Word of God says. This is crucial to getting typical average Christians to get a better handle on Theological issues instead of merely believing what their church or pastor or favorite televangelist believes. They get into the Word and discover what God’s Word is saying by studying it for themselves.
At the end of each question, Scholar would present a list of more articles to resources inside the user’s personal Logos Library they could visit for more information, as well as additional books they currently don’t own but cover the question they’re asking. These would link to the Logos and Vyrso bookstores and allow them to purchase the books, if so desired.
Below all of that would be links to thousands of online articles from selected Christian websites that Logos has personally chosen that would display quality material and answers to Biblical questions. Websites such as InTouch.org, LWF.org, various Academic sites, etc., all contain a wealth of quality articles that answer Biblical questions. Scholar would tie all of this together under one roof and make searching all of this quality Christian content a breeze.
Scholar could be used for a wide range of searches, including:
1. Biblical Weights/Measures Calculations
2. Simple and Complex Bible Searches
3. Answers to deep Theological and Biblical Questions
4. Answers to counseling situations
5. Answers to evangelism situations, Apologetics, etc.
6. Answers to deep Theological debates, presenting the information in an understandable format
7. And much more
And wouldn’t it be great if I were witnessing to someone and asked Scholar “How does one come to a saving relationship in Jesus Christ” and have Scholar present the text of the Plan of Salvation at my fingertips, allowing me to walk someone through the Gospel message of Salvation.
Scholar would go everywhere Logos Bible Software goes. It could start on the mobile front (as this would be the ideal opportunity for it), then work its way into the desktop homepage next to the Go box. Scholar would become a new way to take searching to an entirely new level by asking Logos your toughest Biblical questions.
So that’s Scholar. It would be one’s personal Bible Scholar, everywhere they go. Only a company such as Logos Bible Software could present such an amazing research tool. I’d love to see it happen!
One last thing: If Logos decides to go for this and wishes to "reward" me for the suggestion, feel free to pay me in books. :-)
Nathan Parker
Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com
Comments
-
Nathan,
- do You have an idea who should sit and prioritize the resources? Should it be based only on how the user has prioritized (I think so, one reason being it's better to be aware of the prioritizing), or something else such as Faithlife group sharing of prioritizing (my second option, obsolete after a while and that's the problem)?
- should blogs be included? Should users be able to add blogs to their own system (I think so) which would be automatically compiled?
Question to all: should we be forced to buy the L5 Minimal Crossgrade before upgrading to L? Scholar? (I DEFINATELY don't think we should have to!!)
Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 120 -
Unix said:
Question to all: should we be forced to buy the L5 Minimal Crossgrade
Sorry I don't understand.
I don't see that anyone is forced to buy any particular version of Logos software.
Different versions are required to access different levels of functionality but that's a different issue.
0 -
I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!:
Graham Criddle said:Sorry I don't understand.
I don't see that anyone is forced to buy any particular version of Logos software.
Different versions are required to access different levels of functionality but that's a different issue:
Unix said:Question to all: should we be forced to buy the L5 Minimal Crossgrade
Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 120 -
Unix said:
I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
I don't believe this is true.
To get some of the L4 features they needed to purchase the L4 Min Crossgrade
But the L5 engine itself was free.
Or am I missing your point?
EDIT: Nathan, apologies for hijacking your thread about possible future Logos functionality with a discussion about hypothetical pricing. Sorry about that, Graham
0 -
The idea is interesting, and certainly useful, but it would be quite a project for a company like Logos to pull off. Siri is a feat of engineering that has pulled together numerous fields and a multitude of research by JPL and the most profitable software company of our day.
Essentially, three components are needed for something like Siri (and the proposed Logos Scholar) to work.
- Parsing voice input to text. As you say, there are companies that are doing a very good job of this. However, they (and Siri) are working from a more limited vocabulary than would be required for a Biblical scholarship app. For this app to work well, it would have to understand theological words like "supralapsarian," difficult names (e.g. distinguishing between "Elijah" and "Elisha"), and Greek and Hebrew terms. Ideally, it would also accept and correct incorrect pronunciations. I'm not sure this level of voice parsing is available today.
- Converting natural language queries into well-defined search queries. This is the big kicker. The algorithms used by Siri and Wolfram|Alpha are cutting edge, and work with a very limited and well-structured dataset. Logos resources are books, not databases, so a flexible search that would return different results for different users depending on their resources and prioritization would be very difficult to pull off. User prioritization, by the way, could not be the end of the story. My highest-ranked dictionary is Anchor Yale, but if I ask my phone what "Textual Criticism" is I wouldn't want it to rattle off an 18 page answer.
- Running the query. This is the part that Logos already has mostly down, but would need some enhancement. It has search queries, indexing, and all that in place, but it's not very good at pulling up atomic answers. It can look up a milestone in a dictionary, but it can't, say, convert units. That said, those are things that developers have been doing for a long time, so it probably wouldn't be too hard to implement.
So it's not impossible, but I don't see it happening in the near future, at least without some serious grant money. What it more feasible is that they only develop part 3, perhaps letting us enter unit conversions into the command bar. I wouldn't expect it to take natural language input (e.g. "What is the equivalent of five cubits in imperial measurement?"), but perhaps it would take a more rigid structure (e.g. "CONVERT 5 cubits TO feet").
0 -
I meant if You wanted anything but the free engine, such as the L5 Minimal Crossgrade or an L5 base-package. Unsure whether it applied to getting the L5 Core Datasets.
It is of course true that without the L4 Minimal Crossgrade no full functionality would have been gained at the L5 software level, and that some L5 datasets probably (partially?) build upon some of the L4 datasets, so separating these from each other would have meant extra coding. But at this point I think it's time to say stop and request that no L5 Minimal Crossgrade should be required for L5 Bronze and up owners!L5 Starter is a different thing, again IMO, since it's quite bare-bones. Same regarding L5 Core Datasets owners wanting to upgrade to L? Scholar. For those categories some type of special mid-level construction should be done as entry level to L? Scholar, and for full functionality L5 Minimal Crossgrade should be required.
(And certainly those who would not want Scholar should not need to pay for it and wouldn't get it, but that goes without saying and doesn't need to be requested.):
Graham Criddle said:I don't believe this is true.
To get some of the L4 features they needed to purchase the L4 Min Crossgrade
But the L5 engine itself was free.
Or am I missing your point?:
Unix said:I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
Some pricing discussion is relevant: those who don't/won't have all the L5 datasets would not get all the L? Scholar functionality! That would be the very best pricing model IMO, otherwise the step to Scholar would be more steep for those who are not asking for full Scholar functionality.
Besides, in the long run the new pricing model I'm suggesting would aid Logos a little bit in prioritizing man-hours on the different datasets and functionality if all users have the choice to design their setup, i.e. with or without the L5 Minimal Crossgrade:Graham Criddle said:EDIT: Nathan, apologies for hijacking your thread about possible future Logos functionality with a discussion about hypothetical pricing. Sorry about that, Graham:
Unix said:I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 120 -
Unix said:
Nathan,
- do You have an idea who should sit and prioritize the resources? Should it be based only on how the user has prioritized (I think so, one reason being it's better to be aware of the prioritizing), or something else such as Faithlife group sharing of prioritizing (my second option, obsolete after a while and that's the problem)?
- should blogs be included? Should users be able to add blogs to their own system (I think so) which would be automatically compiled?
Question to all: should we be forced to buy the L5 Minimal Crossgrade before upgrading to L? Scholar? (I DEFINATELY don't think we should have to!!)
What I meant about "Prioritized Resources" is for example, I could ask Scholar "Search my Preferred Bible for all occurrences of the word 'faith'" would search my Preferred Bible I specified my personal Logos library. What I meant by "Prioritized Resources" was simple stuff and would use your personal Logos Prioritized Resources.
For general Bible questions, Scholar wouldn't necessarily have to pull from "Prioritized Resources" (it could, but it wouldn't have to be the case). Scholar would search through your library and try to determine the "best" information to display inline, while linking to the rest of your library as additional resources links. How Logos would determine the "best" information would have to probably be done with some type of algorithm. Scholar would try to look for specialty books first (such as books that specifically cover the question being asked) and present articles and excerpts inline with links to more information, then fallback to more "general" Bible dictionaries, etc. Scholar could also check the lengths of articles, so instead of displaying something massive (from AYBD) or something too short, it'd find an article to display in line that's more manageable, or if tapping into massive resources, display excerpts in line with links to the full article. Logos could also tag charts, graphics, infographs, etc., inside resources, with Scholar heavily drawing from them. For example on my searching Christ's return, instead of spitting out the full text of the Pre-Trib, Post-Trib, etc., debate, Scholar would display a summarized chart or graphic from a resource highlighting the major differences in opinions, with links to more articles on the subject, allowing people to dig into the more detailed stuff at their leisure.
Basically there'd be a lot of extensive tagging going on under the hood to feed Scholar's intelligence. Scholar would use the tagging to look for resources, charts, and information to display that's both understandable and clearly presentable to someone who's never picked these resources up before yet gets them into quality resources and information they could never accomplish in print or through traditional search methods.
It's more involving that it seems and would require a lot of design intelligence to pull it off, but it'd sure be great.
Logos could add various blogs to Scholar to search. It's possible Logos could add the ability for users to add their own personal sites, but it could become tedious as well. What may possibly be better is a "suggest site" feature where a Logos user suggests a blog or website, and after reviewing it, Logos would add it to the index. That way any QC and tagging needed would be handled by Logos so the end user experience always remains nothing more than sheer excellence.
As for content/pricing, here's my thoughts. First of all, if Logos were to take on a massive project like Scholar, it would involve a major financial and design investment on Logos' part. It takes a ton of programming and design intelligence to pull off something like this. Additionally, hosting Scholar's search engine in the cloud so it could sale to the thousands or millions of people using it, plus continuing to maintain development on such a project and keep up licensing fees for the technologies involved wouldn't be cheap. Hosting costs alone would be staggering.
In order to be a real profit margin for Logos, I'd be shocked if they could market it any other way but by a monthly subscription just to cover their developmental costs. However, if Logos could sell Scholar as a standalone addin at a decent cost, or integrate it into future higher end base packages (L6 or L7), or offer it included with a Minimal Crossgrade in a future Logos release, we'd be all blessed to be able to get our hands on it. Something of this sort couldn't be offered for free, but if Logos could pull it off where we could actually afford it with our base collections or Minimal Crossgrade purchases, I'd personally be blown away. It'd be worth far more than that.
As for content, I'm sure Scholar would be like anything else Logos offers. If you wanted to use it with a handful of books, you could attempt it, but your results aren't going to be that great. Just like everything else Logos, the more books you own, the better your search results would be. So for those that own higher end base packages or the datasets contained in the Minimal Crossgrades, etc., obviously Scholar is going to work better. Scholar would need a wealth of quality information to feed it to produce quality results. So in essence, if Logos marketed it that you didn't have to own the Minimal Crossgrade for Scholar, it'd probably still "function", but the more books you own, the better the results would be.
Nathan Parker
Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com
0 -
Graham Criddle said:Unix said:
I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
I don't believe this is true.
To get some of the L4 features they needed to purchase the L4 Min Crossgrade
But the L5 engine itself was free.
Or am I missing your point?
EDIT: Nathan, apologies for hijacking your thread about possible future Logos functionality with a discussion about hypothetical pricing. Sorry about that, Graham
No worries Graham! Glad you're able to point it out.
And correct, the L5 engine, as well as the L4 engine, L3 engine, and all Logos engines prior, were free. What you're paying for in the Minimal Crossgrades is for all of the high end datasets that the Logos Research Team spent hours laboring over the Word to give you the privilege of searching them with a click. No one should expect these to be free. They're worth every penny I paid for them when I went L5 Platinum, and I got my money's worth out of the the first week I used them in Bible College.
Also, I believe you can get the L5 MC without the L4 MC. You just don't get all of the L4-specific functionality unless you also purchase the L4 MC. I do see where this was a confusing marketing move on Logos' part. Personally for the L5 MC, I would have combined the L4 MC and L5 MC into a single product and just offered it. L5 CD and L5 MC was a little confusing as well. It would have been better to just offer L5 MC instead.
Additionally, some got confused that you could purchase a base package (such as Silver) and add the MC onto it cheap to get all of the latest L5 features with less books. It would have been nice if Logos.com popped up a message in the cart with going Silver offering to add on the L5 MC for the discounted price, explaining that with it, users would get all of the new L5 features, plus the books of the collection of choice. But that was all stuff we had issues with during upgrading, and I'm sure next time around, things'll be done differently. Live and learn.
Nathan Parker
Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com
0 -
Mitchell said:
The idea is interesting, and certainly useful, but it would be quite a project for a company like Logos to pull off. Siri is a feat of engineering that has pulled together numerous fields and a multitude of research by JPL and the most profitable software company of our day.
Essentially, three components are needed for something like Siri (and the proposed Logos Scholar) to work.
- Parsing voice input to text. As you say, there are companies that are doing a very good job of this. However, they (and Siri) are working from a more limited vocabulary than would be required for a Biblical scholarship app. For this app to work well, it would have to understand theological words like "supralapsarian," difficult names (e.g. distinguishing between "Elijah" and "Elisha"), and Greek and Hebrew terms. Ideally, it would also accept and correct incorrect pronunciations. I'm not sure this level of voice parsing is available today.
- Converting natural language queries into well-defined search queries. This is the big kicker. The algorithms used by Siri and Wolfram|Alpha are cutting edge, and work with a very limited and well-structured dataset. Logos resources are books, not databases, so a flexible search that would return different results for different users depending on their resources and prioritization would be very difficult to pull off. User prioritization, by the way, could not be the end of the story. My highest-ranked dictionary is Anchor Yale, but if I ask my phone what "Textual Criticism" is I wouldn't want it to rattle off an 18 page answer.
- Running the query. This is the part that Logos already has mostly down, but would need some enhancement. It has search queries, indexing, and all that in place, but it's not very good at pulling up atomic answers. It can look up a milestone in a dictionary, but it can't, say, convert units. That said, those are things that developers have been doing for a long time, so it probably wouldn't be too hard to implement.
So it's not impossible, but I don't see it happening in the near future, at least without some serious grant money. What it more feasible is that they only develop part 3, perhaps letting us enter unit conversions into the command bar. I wouldn't expect it to take natural language input (e.g. "What is the equivalent of five cubits in imperial measurement?"), but perhaps it would take a more rigid structure (e.g. "CONVERT 5 cubits TO feet").
It is true this would be a massive undertaking. I agree that rolling it out in "stages" would be a good way to go as well. For example, start with unit conversions in the Command Bar, and slowing build and grow it out over time. What I'm showing you is the "big picture of the future". It'd take a while to get there, but could slowly be accomplished along the way by slipping these features into Logos over time and improving the intelligence of them until such a tool such as Scholar could come along and be the one tool to rule them all.
1. I know that voice control technology is good, but true in the sense that I'm not sure if it's that good yet to be used in the Biblical sense. In the meantime, tests could be run on what's currently out there to see how good it is, and if Logos were to undertake such a project, it could work in conjunction with companies to fine tune their voice control technology for the Biblical field. I know that voice control technology is used in technical fields such as healthcare, so it's not impossible to tweak it toward the Biblical field, but it would require research and energy.
2. While it's true that Logos resources are books in a low level sense, in essences, they're still databases in that they contain way more extensive tagging than most eBooks, and it seems Logos books become more intelligently tagged with each new major Logos release. Furthermore, Logos is preparing a lot of its own exclusive databases and datasets that aren't technically books at all but very flexible, powerful, searchable data. The direction Logos has taken with all of the new datasets in L5 pave the way for something like this to exist. Something like this could never have the power it needs without Logos first delivering what they've delivered us in L5 and whatever additional datasets are up their sleeve.
As for user prioritization, see my comments to UNIX above. What I meant by it was much simpler and not the end all means. True that it would not need to rattle off 18 pages of content for simple stuff. :-)
3. As for unit conversions, Wolfram Alpha (which is what I turn to for unit conversions) is powered by Mathematica on the backend. Logos could use Mathematica to write a custom unit conversion app geared toward Biblical weights/measures. The technology is there, it'd just require the effort and expense. IBM Deep QA (aka WATSON) or similar software could be used to run the queries in Scholar. It'd still be pretty massive and costly to implement (although there might be some open-source components that could cut costs, as well as I believe AT&T Cloud offers WATSON in the cloud for developmental purposes) that Logos could tap into to pull all this off.
So it'd take a lot of effort on Logos' part, and we're probably a good while off from seeing something like this happen, but it's fun to talk about it and dream about the future and give Logos the input on how something like this could exist.
Nathan Parker
Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com
0 -
Incorrect:
Nathan Parker said:Also, I believe you can get the L5 MC without the L4 MC. You just don't get all of the L4-specific functionality unless you also purchase the L4 MC. I do see where this was a confusing marketing move on Logos' part:
Unix said:I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 120 -
Unix said:
I meant if You wanted anything but the free engine, such as the L5 Minimal Crossgrade or an L5 base-package. Unsure whether it applied to getting the L5 Core Datasets.
It is of course true that without the L4 Minimal Crossgrade no full functionality would have been gained at the L5 software level, and that some L5 datasets probably (partially?) build upon some of the L4 datasets, so separating these from each other would have meant extra coding. But at this point I think it's time to say stop and request that no L5 Minimal Crossgrade should be required for L5 Bronze and up owners!L5 Starter is a different thing, again IMO, since it's quite bare-bones. Same regarding L5 Core Datasets owners wanting to upgrade to L? Scholar. For those categories some type of special mid-level construction should be done as entry level to L? Scholar, and for full functionality L5 Minimal Crossgrade should be required.
(And certainly those who would not want Scholar should not need to pay for it and wouldn't get it, but that goes without saying and doesn't need to be requested.):
Graham Criddle said:I don't believe this is true.
To get some of the L4 features they needed to purchase the L4 Min Crossgrade
But the L5 engine itself was free.
Or am I missing your point?:
Unix said:I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
Some pricing discussion is relevant: those who don't/won't have all the L5 datasets would not get all the L? Scholar functionality! That would be the very best pricing model IMO, otherwise the step to Scholar would be more steep for those who are not asking for full Scholar functionality.
Besides, in the long run the new pricing model I'm suggesting would aid Logos a little bit in prioritizing man-hours on the different datasets and functionality if all users have the choice to design their setup, i.e. with or without the L5 Minimal Crossgrade:Graham Criddle said:EDIT: Nathan, apologies for hijacking your thread about possible future Logos functionality with a discussion about hypothetical pricing. Sorry about that, Graham:
Unix said:I hope history doesn't repeat itself! L3 owners had to purchase the L4 Minimal Crossgrade in order to then upgrade to L5!
Logos could have incorporated the L4 and L5 MC into one package (would have been easier from a marketing standpoint), and added the L5 MC to Bronze and Silver, although I’m sure the cost to do so would have been higher. The L5 datasets weren’t cheap to put together, and I think even adding them onto L5 Bronze or Silver at the extra cost during upgrade is still a great deal.
As for Scholar, it’d probably work best with the datasets contained in the MC, so it could either be included in the MC and higher end base collections (probably best move), or priced as a standalone addin, albeit with that, functionality may not be quite as good since there’s less material there feeding Scholar.
Shocking if Logos could pull this off without a monthly subscription fee, we’d all come out good! The hosting bill to run Scholar in the cloud alone would be $$$.
For those that didn’t want it, correct, they wouldn’t have to pay for it. I see it as something Logos could include in higher end base packages, or with the MC, or if people wanted the MC without Scholar, offer an MC + Scholar bundle. That could be a way to justify the development costs on it, and ensure it works with a decent set of books and datasets to ensure the end user experience is nothing less than excellent.
Nathan Parker
Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com
0
