Over the lifetime of Logos 7, you i.e. Faithlife made tremendous progress in documentation and quality of releases. So, yes, we know you do listen even when it feels like you are wandering off into new for the sake of new. Please take this as a strong suggestion not a criticism.
I have been documenting the Passage Guide sections for TIP of the day ... Ancient Literature, the deprecated Apparatuses, Atlas went reasonably quickly with only a few bug/suggestions that slowed things down. Biblical Events, on the other hand, has been hellacious as (a) it is undocumented and (b) several bugs have shown up and (c) it is older data that has not always been well integrated into new features.
It would be easy to say "you've lived with the bugs for years, you can stand a few more", but that is NOT what the system feels like. With the ability to run single section Guides, you have asked us to concentrate on the contents of a single section. L7 was designed with the implication we only skimmed over many of the sections. The difference between L7 and L8 therefore accentuates the problems - to the detriment of L8.
This concentration is reinforced by the presence of the individual sections in the Workflows. I have run into a case where the workflow directions cannot be followed because of an error in the Guide. This may be perceived by users as problems with the workflow, when the Guides are the actual source of the problem.
Therefore, I request that Faithlife prioritize all the little bugs in the Guides and related data by methodically working through the Guide sections as slowly as one per release cycle so that the increased awareness/annoyance of the bugs is counteracted by an awareness of correction/improvement. It would also be helpful to see additional progress on the documentation of "old datasets". You've made so much progress on the documentation that I now assume it will be there.
Thanks for your time,
MJ Smith, hoping that I speak for a number of silent users.
