Metadata issue: Study Bible vs. Bible Notes

Why is Geneva Bible: Notes. Geneva: Rovland Hall, 1560. type:Bible notes while Biblical Studies Press. The NET Bible First Edition Notes. Biblical Studies Press, 2006. and Wansbrough, Henry, ed. The New Jerusalem Bible. New York; London; Toronto; Sydney; Auckland: Doubleday, 1990. are type:Study Bible?

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

Dave Hooton

Why is Geneva Bible: Notes. Geneva: Rovland Hall, 1560. type:Bible notes while Biblical Studies Press. The NET Bible First Edition Notes. Biblical Studies Press, 2006. and Wansbrough, Henry, ed. The New Jerusalem Bible. New York; London; Toronto; Sydney; Auckland: Doubleday, 1990. are type:Study Bible?

type:study bible enables them to be included with commentaries in PG and Factbook. EDIT: type:Bible-Notes are used as Commentaries.

There are ones with "Notes" in their title that could be Study-Bible, but NET Notes is not one of them.

Doc B

Why is

I asked that same question a while back and was told "it's not important." It was even hinted that I was ignorant for not being able to tell the difference. [:(]

But it sure makes getting all the SB/BN resources into a collection or other place a lot harder. And the solution isn't to include them both, as some of the type:bible notes resources are *not* study-type notes.

I still can't tell the difference with some of them...guess I'm just uncultured.

MJ. Smith

There are ones with "Notes" in their title that could be Study-Bible, but NET Notes is not one of them.

Yet it is one of them which is.

Dave Hooton

But it sure makes getting all the SB/BN resources into a collection or other place a lot harder. And the solution isn't to include them both, as some of the type:bible notes resources are *not* study-type notes.

I use Study Bible and Bible Notes as 'special' Commentaries, but I use mytags to select them. I got caught out with NET Notes now being a Study Bible, but tagging fixed that.

FL are definitely not consistent with their classification of Commentaries and Study Bibles, especially the "All the ....in the Bible" titles in their Biblical and Theological Lists. So I tag them into submission and they don't get used as commentaries.

Mark Barnes (Logos)

We made some changes to this recently, because we had lots of inconsistencies.

Most of these types of books will now be study Bibles. Typically, a study Bible will cover either the whole Bible or a testament. It will be shorter than a on-volume Bible commentary, but intended to help the reader interpret the Bible.

We'll use "Study Notes" "Bible Notes" for similar books that don't meet the above definition. Often study notes will be translation notes for a specific Bible version, or brief marginal notes that were split out of a bible.

The NET Bible Notes and the Geneva Bible Notes happened to fall either side of a dividing lines somewhere between these two definitions. I suspect Geneva's brevity maybe counted against it.

We need to draw the line somewhere, but if you feel strongly, I can ask for it to be changed.

MJ. Smith

We need to draw the line somewhere, but if you feel strongly, I can ask for it to be changed.

What I really feel strongly about is providing us with the definitions for each resource type so that we can understand and build collections correctly. It would save us so much time. Thanks for the explanation.

Dave Hooton

We made some changes to this recently, because we had lots of inconsistencies.

And still do. I've posted specifics elsewhere.

We'll use "Study Notes" for similar books that don't meet the above definition. Often study notes will be translation notes for a specific Bible version, or brief marginal notes that were split out of a bible.

"Study Notes" is new to me Did you mean "Bible Notes"? Because the latter fits NET Notes very well.

Typically, a study Bible will cover either the whole Bible or a testament. It will be shorter than a on-volume Bible commentary, but intended to help the reader interpret the Bible.

Most books with "Study Bible" in their title fit that category very well, and the ones that have "Notes" in their title generally fit that category. So where does NET Notes qualify to be shorter than a bible commentary? Does it not qualify to be a commentary like Metzger's Textual Commentary, whilst it could be regarded as an "All the Notes in the Bible" commentary[:P]. It definitely helps the reader interpret the bible, but mainly as textual notes.

Mark Barnes (Logos)

"Study Notes" is new to me Did you mean "Bible Notes"?

Apologies. I did mean "Bible Notes".

When NET Bible was "Bible Notes", users would complain that it wouldn't show up in the Passage Guide or Insights, which I'm sympathetic to.

Dave Hooton

When NET Bible was "Bible Notes", users would complain that it wouldn't show up in the Passage Guide or Insights, which I'm sympathetic to.

I never had that problem, and I had to alter my Collection rule after the change to Study Bible. Bible Notes do appear in Passage Guide and are listed as as Bible Notes under Type. So I doubt the validity of those complaints and why they even influenced the change. Please revert back to Bible Notes.