Is Section required in the new search syntax?

I am trying to get my mind around when "Section:" is required in Logos 10 searches. The search WIki (https://wiki.logos.com/New_Search_HELP#Section_Searches) is confusing about this. It seems to suggest that "Section:" is no longer required.

Here is an example:

Logos 9 Bible search

<Event The flood> -- returns no matches
{Section <Event The flood>} -- works properly

Logos 10 Bible search

event:"The flood" -- works just fine
section:event:"The flood" -- returns the same results

It appears that to make the search simpler, "Section:" is no longer required. Is this correct?

Another other puzzle here, is that in Logos 9, the search for {Section <Event The flood>} in the NASB 1995 returns 82 results. In Logos 10, section:event:"The flood" returns only 79 results. When I merge a passage list from the two searches and only include the difference, there are no verses. So the search returns the same verses, but the tally of results is different. I cannot see why.

Any thoughts on this?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

Another other puzzle here, is that in Logos 9, the search for {Section <Event The flood>} in the NASB 1995 returns 82 results. In Logos 10, section:event:"The flood" returns only 79 results. When I merge a passage list from the two searches and only include the difference, there are no verses.

The L10 result removes the spurious chapter results from L9 i.e. Ge 7, 8 and 9.

In L9 ESV there are two spurious chapter results.

Dave Hooton

Logos 9 Bible search

<Event The flood> -- returns no matches

{Section <Event The flood>} -- works properly

Logos 10 Bible search

event:"The flood" -- works just fine

section:event:"The flood" -- returns the same results

It appears that to make the search simpler, "Section:" is no longer required. Is this correct?

The wiki states:

section:datatype:=~value —> this is equivalent to {Section <datatype value>} in Logos 9
reference:datatype:=~value —> this is equivalent to <datatype value> in Logos 9
datatype:=~value ==> section OR reference
- this format is used for most practical purposes, but use the section keyword for more accurate results.

Faithlife allow a reference:event:"The flood" to be included i.e. event:"The flood" = reference:event:"The flood" OR section:event:"The flood".

So you will find that event:"The flood" = section:event:"The flood" in Bibles only as there are no references to that event. Outside bibles, event:"The flood" produces the same results as <Event The flood> in L9, but these are references to the event i.e. event:"The flood" = reference:event:"The flood" outside Bibles. The Context menu will prefer the datatype:=~value format.

One other difference to L9 is that event:="The flood" will restrict results to the actual flood e.g. Ge 6, 7 and 8 (as per Factbook). On the other hand event:="God floods the earth" will return 2 Peter 3:6 when it should be restricted to Ge 7 (as per Factbook). AFAIK these are data errors that need fixing.

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259706#Comment_1259706

One other difference to L9 is that event:="The flood" will restrict results to the actual flood e.g. Ge 6, 7 and 8 (as per Factbook). On the other hand event:="God floods the earth" will return 2 Peter 3:6 when it should be restricted to Ge 7 (as per Factbook). AFAIK these are data errors that need fixing.

For "God floods the earth", Factbook lists Gen 7 as the Key Passage, since those are the defining references of the event, and lists 2 Peter 3:6 as a "See Also" passage because it is a mentioning reference. See the Biblical Event Navigator for details. It seems entirely reasonable that search would return both defining references and mentioning references.

The one quirk I see is that for "The flood", Search returns the mentioning references of its children (which seems reasonable), while Factbook does not list those under See Also. I've written up a bug report to add these references.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259737#Comment_1259737

The one quirk I see is that for "The flood", Search returns the mentioning references of its children (which seems reasonable), while Factbook does not list those under See Also. I've written up a bug report to add these references.

The "quirk" that I see, Andrew, is that the child "mentioning references" (under See Also) are references and I think it confusing that these are returned as section data instead of references i.e. instead of reference:event:"The flood", when that keyword came with L10 syntax.

Now, Key passages for "the flood" (in Factbook) are Gen 6 to 8 whilst its child "God makes a covenant with Noah" has Gen 6 to 9. I believe this is incorrect hierarchically nor should it be a "mentioning reference".

Outside of bibles:

"God makes a covenant with Noah" presumably comes from reference:event:"The flood" because of the hierarchy (reference:event:="The flood" only includes strict mentions of the flood)? Again, it is not intuitive.

Andrew Batishko

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259769#Comment_1259769

I think it confusing that these are returned as section data instead of references

That's because the data isn't tagged directly on the Bible or reverse interlinear, and therefore is section data instead of reference data. This inability for a user to easily determine which type of query is appropriate is part of why the newer syntax is easier to use... you don't have to care if you just use event:"The flood"

Now, Key passages for "the flood" (in Factbook) are Gen 6 to 8 whilst its child "God makes a covenant with Noah" has Gen 6 to 9. I believe this is incorrect hierarchically nor should it be a "mentioning reference".

I agree that it does seem like "The Flood" should have Gen 6-9 as mentioning references, since those are the mentioning references of the child events. The mentioning references on the parents in the hierarchy is part of the data, rather than something that is determine at run time. I've made a request to the data team to reconsider if the "defining references" for this event.

nor should it be a "mentioning reference".

You lost me here. Which reference should not be a mentioning reference?

"God makes a covenant with Noah" presumably comes from reference:event:"The flood" because of the hierarchy (reference:event:="The flood" only includes strict mentions of the flood)? Again, it is not intuitive.

Sorry, I'm not understanding you. I think it's because you are confusing things by talking about the data in terms of search syntax. "God makes a covenant with Noah" doesn't come from a search. It comes from the Biblical Event data, where each event has a list of defining references and mentioning references. All those references can be searched using the event: or section:event: syntax.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259773#Comment_1259773

Sorry, I'm not understanding you. I think it's because you are confusing things by talking about the data in terms of search syntax.

Thanks for your response, Andrew. When my head clears from this 'flu event I'll try to clarify matters!