BUG? - Information missing from new Context menu?

Your question is about an issue with 8.7? Do the descriptors appear when you hover over each line (which is what happens for me in 8.6)?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057738#Comment_1057738

an issue with 8.7?

Yes, the latest Beta version.

"When you hover over each line?" - I am unsure what you mean "Alabama"

[I cannot get a "snip" as it disappears when I click on the screen]

eg Isaiah 1:1 in NIV 2011 The "vision" .concerning Judah etc..

the new right click menu -- The new left side of it.

- Selection vision

- Reference Isaiah 1:1

[Then there is a faint horizontal grey coloured separator line] beneath it are 3 lines of Hebrew words,

on the 2nd & 3rd lines there are English glosses after the Hebrew words.

- 2nd line: "vision, word of revelation"

- 3rd line: "to see, behold"

In the past those lines with Hebrew word(s) and English glosses had further English words to the right of them in CAPITAL letters such as MANUSCRIPT OR LEMMA etc

That no longer appears.

Were they removed even before this latest beta? Did I just miss that change?

[Sorry to be unable to produce a visual representation.]

Thanks for your questions

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057741#Comment_1057741

Steve, just for info, I have L7, which is as Alabama describes ... only the unknowable images are visible (pi, @, <>) ... the uppercase english demand a mouseover ... eg SELECTION, MANUSCRIPT, LEMMA, etc

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057748#Comment_1057748

THANK YOU Alabama and Denise

Sadly, I had my Information "update" set on "click" rather than "hover" so any "mouseover" was not working for me.

EDIT: It works the way you describe (with hover revealing those desired terms) on my Stable 8.6 Verbum software

But NOT on my 8.7 Beta Logos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057741#Comment_1057741

In the past those lines with Hebrew word(s) and English glosses had further English words to the right of them in CAPITAL letters such as MANUSCRIPT OR LEMMA etc

That no longer appears.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057752#Comment_1057752

It works the way you describe (with hover revealing those desired terms) on my Stable 8.6 Verbum software

But NOT on my 8.7 Beta Logos

OK. In which case I assume this is a bug.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057754#Comment_1057754

OK. In which case I assume this is a bug.

Thanks Alabama

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057753#Comment_1057753

Thank you for being able to put up this screen sshot.

YES - That is the "(correct"/expected) behaviour that is present in my 8.6 Verbum

But the Beta 8.7 Logos is not working that way for me. "Hover" does not reveal those terms etc

Thanks again

Adam Borries (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057754#Comment_1057754

Sorry the delay responding here.

I assume this is a bug.

This is not a bug; it was an intentional design choice for the context menu refresh.

We removed the inline, on-hover context label (Lemma, Root, Person, etc.) when we added it as a header on the command (right) side.

Yes, we recognize that this leaves only the icons to distinguish them on the left side; but I think it wouldn't take long for a regular user to realize that "√" means root, etc.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1058797#Comment_1058797

"√" means root, etc.

Unfortunately I have never been able to figure out the reasoning/meaning behind most of Logos' icons.

[old guy - raised on "text-based" notation etc.]

But Thanks Adam for this reply. It is appreciated.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1058851#Comment_1058851

Root, I get the icon bit the rest never had any meaning I could associate with the terms they represented. I think it’s a big and disappointing assumption on FL’s part that we will know what these mean. And what about new users to the software. How are they to learn what the symbols mean. Is this going to be properly documented in the softwares help file?

"√" means root, etc.

Unfortunately I have never been able to figure out the reasoning/meaning behind most of Logos' icons.

[old guy - raised on "text-based" notation etc.]

But Thanks Adam for this reply. It is appreciated.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1058869#Comment_1058869

And what about new users to the software. How are they to learn what the symbols mean.

On hover, there is no explanation for the root symbol in Morph Search; whilst there is something for lemmas.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1058869#Comment_1058869

Root, I get the icon bit the rest never had any meaning I could associate with the terms they represented.

[Y]

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1058869#Comment_1058869

the rest never had any meaning I could associate with the terms they represented

Let me take a stab at helping build some associations for you. Note that this is only my own interpretation, since I had no involvement in creating the icons.

From the top...

καρδίαν - surface text - looks like lines of text in a book

καρδία - lemma - looks like the translation ring in a Bible word study (which operates on lemmas)

καρδια - root - looks like a mathematical square root symbol

NASF - morph - uses the symbol used to display the morphology picker in a morph search

Strong's Greek #2588 / LN 26.3 - data type reference - uses the < > symbols that are used when searching for places where a reference is tagged

self <=> heart - sense - nope, I got nothing. I know it's a Greek alpha, but I don't associate it with anything

Heart - Bible knowledgebase reference with a subtype of Thing - it's a box, which is an object... a thing

Jesus' ministry / etc. - event - like a flag on a map, marking where something occurred

Jesus - speaker - a megaphone, someone talking

Disciples - addressee - a person with sound waves coming at their head... they're being talked to

Adultery - preaching theme - a pulpit

The remainder are data type references, as above.

It's not much, but hopefully is of some help.

Donnie Hale

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059036#Comment_1059036

The fact that we need a legend to explain the icons (IMO) proves the previous points about them not being discoverable / intuitive (a point with which I agree). I know space is limited, but there's got to be something better than hoping I pick the right one.

-Donnie

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059367#Comment_1059367

Allow me to reinterate my request that a key to the icons be included in help ... and that a template of them be available for diagrams.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059426#Comment_1059426

Out of sight, out of mind. It would be a better experience for the information to be readily visible, instead of requiring us to recall the icon meanings, or remember where to find the legend. Let’s not make things more cryptic or obscure, please.

Logos Help is not an option I tend to think of or use, unfortunately. If there’s no “tooltip” to explain something, I turn to Google out of habit.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059036#Comment_1059036

NASF - morph - uses the symbol used to display the morphology picker in a morph search

For people like me who have (used the context menu to run a morph search, but) have never typed in a morph search string, this association would be foreign.

Logos is quite powerful. One of the things that gets brought up now and then is that people only use about 10% of the program. Removing the icon meanings would make Logos slightly harder to use for us neophytes, and make the learning curve slightly steeper.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059440#Comment_1059440

For people like me who have (used the context menu to run a morph search, but) have never typed in a morph search string, this association would be foreign.

That symbol aside, NASF is translated by the text that follows. People familiar with a morphological search would understand what was intended.

Removing the icon meanings would make Logos slightly harder to use for us neophytes, and make the learning curve slightly steeper.

With time, their meaning will stick. And one only has to click to see a meaning on the opposite side, but you still have to understand 'Morph', 'Lemma', 'Root', 'Manuscript', 'Thing', 'Sense' etc.! There is always a learning curve.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059436#Comment_1059436

If there’s no “tooltip” to explain something

I am not opposed to tooltips but I consider them dangerous. They let one "play scholar" without really understanding what one is looking at. For example, I consider morphology to be "useless" until one can parse it yourself. When you can tag it yourself, you understand well enough to actually use the tooltip "cheat sheets" - enough to be able to notice ambiguity that has been "cleaned up" and errors in Logos coding. Note that as a formal student one is asked to "play scholar" in order to become one.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059445#Comment_1059445

There is always a learning curve.

True, but this places more of a burden on the user to stop and decode the meanings.

I don’t think the program should become less intuitive, as not all customers are power users, academics, pastors, etc.

While I’m grateful for expert users and employees who understand search operators and can construct searches by hand, I’m still dependent on the context menu to perform queries.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059445#Comment_1059445

There is always a learning curve.

(I do not want to quarrel publicly with you David. You have helped me many times through the years and I deeply appreciate your efforts and talent.) So, Dave, I [mostly] agree with your "learning curve" comment.[:)]

But - as the OP of this thread - the largest part of my confusion with this new "direction" [of leaving out these helpful explanatory terms] is that it seems to be going counter to Logos' more recent attempts to make the software more user-friendly/approachable etc. [especially to new users or those with little to no formal theological training]. ie. One recent example of this helpful trend would be "Workflows." [eg. I assume that even the recent change from moving away from the "right to left" in the context menu was an attempt to be less "unique"/confusing to some new users]

Therefore taking away these helpful defining/clarifying words seems [to me] to result in again "up-ing" the GEEK factor. [That, "geek-i-ness" quotient, even more so than the higher $$$ cost, has been the biggest hindrance to my attempts to interest others in this wonderful software].

[And as I mentioned in one of my early posts - personally it is not the Greek that is the issue - it is the Hebrew. Many years ago in my Christian Education/Music major, Hebrew was not required. Since then I have laboured to just be able to recognize/handle the alphabet so that I might benefit from the fine Hebrew Dictionaries/Lexicons that are so helpful in Logos].

I did appreciate the helpful attempt to "de-code" some of the more [esoteric] icons. [:)]

I do not think that this issue is "a-hill-to-'die'-on" - rather I ask the fine developers at Logos to please try to keep this point in mind as they continue in their attempts to make the software still even more "user-friendly."

I also appreciate some of the things added back into Logos 8 that were present in 6 but somehow were left out of 7. Overall I think Logos 8 is "easier" to use etc. As I approach 70 years of age I only wish that this quality software had been available back in the early-to-mid 1970's when I was beginning Pastoral ministry.

Thanks so much

[EDIT] Sorry, "PetahChristian" - I did not see/realize that you had just made the same point.

Thank you!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1058797#Comment_1058797

We removed the inline, on-hover context label (Lemma, Root, Person, etc.) when we added it as a header on the command (right) side.

Thanks Adam, for that reply.

However, after years of "hovering" - It was not really not too "intuitive" to then need to "click" on the left side term in order for that helpful explanatory term to be revealed on the right side.

Thanks for all you do for us.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059498#Comment_1059498

There is always a learning curve.

Dave, I [mostly] agree with your "learning curve" comment.

But - as the OP of this thread - the largest part of my confusion with this new "direction" [of leaving out these helpful explanatory terms] is that it seems to be going counter to Logos' more recent attempts to make the software more user-friendly/approachable etc. [especially to new users or those with little to no formal theological training].

True, but this places more of a burden on the user to stop and decode the meanings.

I don’t think the program should become less intuitive, as not all customers are power users, academics, pastors, etc.

Steve and Petah

My earlier post stated there was no explanation of the symbol for Root in Morph Search; whilst the Lemma symbol has an information pop-up. My immediate reaction to the Context menu change was much the same as yours, until I realised that the explanation was at the top of the opposite side, and that you first had to click the item. That's the learning curve for users familiar with the hover method (which I prefer!).

My other point is that 'Lemma', 'Root', etc. may decode the symbol, but not every user understands what they are! That took me some time to learn; not being an academic or theology student[8-|].

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059564#Comment_1059564

My immediate reaction to the Context menu change was much the same as yours, until I realised that the explanation was at the top of the opposite side, and that you first had to click the item. That's the learning curve for users familiar with the hover method (which I prefer!).

[Dave, I had made a faulty assumption/jumped to a conclusion etc]

Thanks so much for that clarification!

Harry Hahne

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059367#Comment_1059367

The fact that we need a legend to explain the icons (IMO) proves the previous points about them not being discoverable / intuitive (a point with which I agree). I know space is limited, but there's got to be something better than hoping I pick the right one.

[Y]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059036#Comment_1059036

The idea of a Bible software is to make things easier and faster for the user. I'm spending too much time in the forums asking questions that shouldn't even need to be asked. And you still didn't get all of them. How are people like me supposed to figure them all out?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063150#Comment_1063150

How are people like me supposed to figure them all out?

One helpful change that Morris Proctor pointed out, is that "The item you selected on the left is now clearly labeled at the top of the right-hand side. (F)"

That should help identify any symbols which might not have been previously explained.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063155#Comment_1063155

I see the information at the top right, but I don't see anything that will help with symbols.

Thank you for writing.

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1059452#Comment_1059452

I am not opposed to tooltips but I consider them dangerous. They let one "play scholar" without really understanding what one is looking at.

[Y] Very true, but I still use them, even when I know what they mean [:$]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063156#Comment_1063156

I don't see anything that will help with symbols.

A Faithlife staffer tried to help with this recently but even he admitted "guessing" at a few icon/symbols OR guessing "why" there was a particular graphic for that particular item.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063281#Comment_1063281

thank you. I like the old right click better. I suspect that only the real advanced users will see the improvements, assuming, of course, there are any./

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063282#Comment_1063282

I like the old right click better. I suspect that only the real advanced users will see the improvements, assuming, of course, there are any./

A number of non-advanced users really like the changes. Some, like yourself, regret the removal of the hover tooltip. So do I!

I don't like many of the changes in the Logos 8 interface (coming from Logos 7). We struggle on, though.