RESOLVED/ACKNOWLEDGED BUG: Search hints re: labels

First problem:

When I enter {Label into the Search argument box I get a number of suggestions which lead me to undocumented options e.g.

{Label Additional Information} finds 540 results in 49 resources all bibliographic references to commentaries on Biblical books - apparently I can search for Bible book information that appears in Factbook - I think this is documented.

{Label Anxiety} finds nothing in my library

{Label Archive} finds nothing in my library

{Label Alain} finds nothing in my library

I think that the Labels offered should be Labels for which I can find the parameters required to use them.

Second Problem:

I can't get it to suggest the Label for Source Criticism

ADMISSION: I am never comfortable using a system that makes suggestions then offers me no information on how to use it. I continue to be unhappy with the new Search help. I agree that the new Search help is more useful to the absolute novice and deserves further development. However, it is almost useless to the intermediate user who needs to see what options are available in order to determine how to build a complex search argument. We have lost the ability to consider whether we want a grammatical or a semantical role ... which semantic roles best fit our needs ... The more I use the new search help the less I like it and the more annoyed I am to be left with nothing useful rather than a less than perfect solution. I strongly believe that both the old and the new should be offered as they meet different needs.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

When I enter {Label into the Search argument box I get a number of suggestions which lead me to undocumented options e.g.

I get 4 valid suggestions for {Label that change after a Search (no parameters). But it also acted as a "history" of my Label searches (with parameters) for a time. {Label a gives 4 valid suggestions - none beginning with that letter.

I can't get it to suggest the Label for Source Criticism

Ditto, even after several searches with parameters.

The Search results are very puzzling, and I don't classify it as a useful search e.g. Basic search for {Label Source Criticism WHERE Critic ~ "Eissfeldt" AND Source ~ "P"} in Lev 1:

3 results in 1 article in LHB (from Lev 1)
31 results in 1 article in ESV (from Lev 1)
4 results in 4 articles in A-F Hebrew (from Lev 1-4)!!

399 results in 1 article for <EissfeldtHexateuch = P>

A Bible search is equally incongruous.

Andrew Batishko

The top few suggestions are always the text of similar searches made by other users. In this case, those labels are not provided by the query engine, and there is no guarantee that they are valid for you. They might be a custom label created by other customers.

This applies to your other thread as well: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/185999.aspx

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1073647#Comment_1073647

This applies to your other thread as well: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/185999.aspx

Tell me this isn't true as the other thread addresses the Context Menu ... I wouldn't want other customers' information popping up there without my explicit approval via shared files.

They might be a custom label created by other customers.

As someone who spent a career in IT ... from paper cards through web apps ... this goes on my list of top stupid design choices. If you don't understand why, allow me to point out:

I have no coordinated list of standard Verbum labels provided by FL
The examples that had been in the Search tool have been removed
The proposed entries offered by the Search include items unique to other people's installation - of no immediate or future use to me.
This represents at least 27 of the most complex, powerful searches in Verbum ... to find the documentation if it exists I must look in (a) Help - this is great, (b) dataset/interactive documentation - this is good, (c) the interactive which may have the documentation integrated, (d) the glossary of terms for the dataset or interactive . . .

Let me show you this in action - actual case from this afternoon:

It occurs to me that I should have a label for mitzvoth.
I tried to find it in Search
Every indication is that the Label Mitz.... does not exist.
So I try things like Commandments, Law ... to no avail
So I look in Manuals with no success
So I go to help and find "commandments of the law" (the interactive) but nothing on a search
So I go to the interactive and identify a passage
I go to that passage in the NRSV
I right click and voila ... I have the label name Mitzvoth!!

I don't call that intuitive user interface. Intuitive would be to show me the possible values when I have typed the first 4 characters of it.

Note also that the methodology most common among conservative Protestants is a small sliver of the multiple methodologies used by myself, much of academia, and much of Catholicism. Therefore, the concept that "similar searches made by other users" is useful to me requires a much tighter definition of "similar searches" than seems to be in play here.

Yes, I get annoyed at Faithlife. You go to great effort to produce some very useful tools - tools that make an incredible amount of useful information available at my fingertips. But then the power is lost to lack of documents, incomplete integration into the system, arbitrary limits on its coverage, development halted before all essential functions are implemented . . . You tease me by being so close to being more than good, being great ... and then I'm dropped flat on my face.

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1073666#Comment_1073666

This applies to your other thread as well: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/185999.aspx

Tell me this isn't true as the other thread addresses the Context Menu ... I wouldn't want other customers' information popping up there without my explicit approval via shared files.

Oops! Sorry, I misread your other thread.

Part of the problem is that the suggestion box doesn't currently have support for suggesting valid label types.

Part of the problem is that the common searches suggestions includes things that may not be valid for you.

I think we have a case for the second problem. We might already have a case for the first. I'll make a note to check tomorrow.

The documentation problem is a separate issue. I can understand how that would be frustrating.

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1073647#Comment_1073647

The top few suggestions are always the text of similar searches made by other users. In this case, those labels are not provided by the query engine, and there is no guarantee that they are valid for you. They might be a custom label created by other customers.

Someone else’s custom label isn’t useful (or valid as you point out), yet showing it might give the impression that it is a valid label that may return results.

Wouldn’t it be better to exclude other customer’s custom labels from the top few suggestions?

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

Thanks for pointing this out.

Logos 8 will no longer provide suggestions for "extension" search terms (such as {Speaker}, {Label}, {Milestone}, {Section}, etc.).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1073686#Comment_1073686

Thanks Bradley. This is a satisfactory solution -- I prefer no information to misleading information.

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1073671#Comment_1073671

the suggestion box doesn't currently have support for suggesting valid label types.

I created a case for this.

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1073747#Comment_1073747

Thanks, Andrew!