a question from an Accordance User
I am not sure if I am posting in the right spot, so please forgive me if this is not correct. I am a current Accordance user and have been for a long time. I have recently been giving serious consideration to moving to Logos, but so far I have been prevented because of Logos' seemingly complete lack of a functional "user bible," which is a critical aspect of my work. A friend of mine suggested I express my concern on the Logos forum to see if I am missing anything.
In order to clarify this concern, let me provide a brief explanation of the user bible in Accordance:
It is able to be written in plain text, which works beautifully for me on a Mac. I use the native Text Edit, and can write "Gen 1:1 In...." and then I am able to import it into Accordance. Doing so I simply say it is a Bible, ask it to follow the verse layout of the published Bible I choose (the default is KJV, but I can change it if I want). Then after I press enter my Bible shows up as a functional searchable Bible which is able to scroll in parallel with any other biblical text. It is simple, clean, and since there isn't any HTML junk, I am still able to use my text for other purposes, which is critical.
This is such an obvious need for an academic that I frankly assumed that Logos had the same thing when I was considering it. However, after downloading the free version of Logos to play around with it (before making any major financial decisions), I started to realized that no, Logos does NOT have anything close to this.
I spoke with a friend who uses both programs, and he told me that the closest thing Logos has is this so-called Personal Book, and that Logos does not distinguish whether it is a Bible or not. Thus, if I want my text to function like a Bible and scroll in parallel with another biblical text, before each word I need to write [[@Bible the verse reference, then ]] before EVERY verse. So.... I need to do this 3,102 times.
That is absurd. I frankly don't have the time for that, and even if I did, it would completely ruin my text making it usable for ONLY uploading to Logos, which is obviously not acceptable.
I have other issues with the PB also, such as it needing to be in a docx format (I am on a Mac and use plain text). Also, if I try uploading it to just be a random PB and don't bother with it being able to scroll in parallel, even searching for random references as if they are words brings false results. If I type "Gen 1:1" it brings me to Gen 1:1, but if I then type "Luke 1" it brings Mark 13:29 to the top of the page. From Gen 1:1, if I type "Rom. 1" it brings Acts 25:26. I can likewise scroll down until I get to Romans and it will be highlighted as searched for. Typing "Rev. 1" brings up 1John 5:15. If I scroll to Rev 1, it is likewise highlighted, and if I type "Rom. 1" it brings me to Rom 6:18.
None of this makes any sense. The only thing I can think is that converting my TextEdit txt file on Mac to a docx format messed something up, but if that was the issue it seems like Logos wouldn't be auto hyperlinking all my verses, but it does. So I would say so far Logos has been pretty frustrating.
So I need to keep using Accordance because of it's beautifully simplistic user bible, but after the suggestion of my friend, I decided to post here just in case I am missing something.
Thank you,
Kristin
Comments
-
Hi Kristin - and welcome to the forums
Kristin said:but so far I have been prevented because of Logos' seemingly complete lack of a functional "user bible," which is a critical aspect of my work
Kristin said:I spoke with a friend who uses both programs, and he told me that the closest thing Logos has is this so-called Personal Book, and that Logos does not distinguish whether it is a Bible or not. Thus, if I want my text to function like a Bible and scroll in parallel with another biblical text, before each word I need to write [[@Bible the verse reference, then ]] before EVERY verse. So.... I need to do this 3,102 times.
Your friend is correct - the Personal Book is the mechanism for doing this sort of thing in Logos. And, as it supports different book types, it is necessary to add some additional coding to indicate verse boundaries etc.
So I'm afraid it may be that Logos does not provide the functionality you are looking for.
Graham
0 -
Hi Graham,
Thank you for the quick response and clarification. I appreciate it.
Is there a way to request this as a potential feature for Logos to add? And if so and you don't mind, please let me know where to do that.
Thank you, and thank you also for your welcome to the forum.
Kristin0 -
Here's the suggestion intro by Phil:
https://community.logos.com/forums/t/195030.aspx?ssi=0
Too bad (in the meantime) your friend can't write you a quick macro (find colon:numeric both sides; another numeric on left?; insert tagging). No offence to Accordance but Logos is growing. But as you observed, they don't like user created resources (even Personal books). I do keep my notes outside Logos, and bring them in auto-tagged similar to Bible text.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Hi DMB,
Thank you for the feedback link. Thank you also for the macro idea, but I don't think it would work since my actual text includes square brackets and numbers (apart from verse references) and might conflict with any type of replace all actions. I might want to still speak with someone who knows how to do this, but that is a concern.
I think the main issue is that the text is in progress. If it was a finished work I would be more inclined to format it and import it, but given that I use it multiple places and it frequently changes, it really needs to stay clean.
I appreciate the idea though.0 -
I am telling Nathan....[:P]
0 -
lol!
Good to see you, ReformedDoc 0 -
ReformedDoc said:
I am telling Nathan....
Great guy, but man did he ruined the Accordance forums and rubbed people the wrong way when he became “the face of Accordance!” I guess, as an employee, he’s required to do that; but Bad for business, though!
DAL
0 -
Kristin said:
I use the native Text Edit, and can write "Gen 1:1 In...." and then I am able to import it into Accordance. Doing so I simply say it is a Bible, ask it to follow the verse layout of the published Bible I choose (the default is KJV, but I can change it if I want).
Elsewhere you state "my actual text includes square brackets and numbers (apart from verse references)". This would say there is a necessary formatting to distinguish verses, which is not dissimilar to the 31,102 square bracket verse references in a Personal Book bible. Does it handle unique pericopes, chapter headings (or non-bible text in general)? Can it distinguish and/or format "red letter" Words of Christ?
Kristin said:I have other issues with the PB also, such as it needing to be in a docx format (I am on a Mac and use plain text). Also, if I try uploading it to just be a random PB and don't bother with it being able to scroll in parallel, even searching for random references as if they are words brings false results. If I type "Gen 1:1" it brings me to Gen 1:1, but if I then type "Luke 1" it brings Mark 13:29 to the top of the page. From Gen 1:1, if I type "Rom. 1" it brings Acts 25:26. I can likewise scroll down until I get to Romans and it will be highlighted as searched for. Typing "Rev. 1" brings up 1John 5:15. If I scroll to Rev 1, it is likewise highlighted, and if I type "Rom. 1" it brings me to Rom 6:18.
The underlined text indicates a use other than that of a Bible, and your search for random references implies that the PB does not have milestones for every verse e.g.when I type Luke 3 it brings me to Luke 2:14 because it is the nearest milestone in the PB.
Kristin said:None of this makes any sense. The only thing I can think is that converting my TextEdit txt file on Mac to a docx format messed something up, but if that was the issue it seems like Logos wouldn't be auto hyperlinking all my verses, but it does.
The best way to resolve this is to upload your docx file (or a sample of it) to the forum by using the paperclip icon. Ensure that it is intended to be a bible, or clarify what it is intended to be e.g. Bible Notes.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Hi DAL,
DAL said:Great guy, but man did he ruined the Accordance forums and rubbed people the wrong way when he became “the face of Accordance!
I unfortunately agree 100% about your impression. The dynamic of the forum changed completely.
DAL said:I guess, as an employee, he’s required to do that; but Bad for business, though!
I don't think he is "required" to do that, as it wasn't like that all with Rick in that spot. I REALLY miss Rick on that forum!
0 -
Hi DAL,
DAL said:So what’s so special about your Bible that other Bibles don’t have? Is it your own translation?
Ya, it is my own translation. I still see value in, and regularly use, published Bibles, but I have been working on my translation for years and have poured my sweat and blood into it. So it is important to me.
0 -
Hi Dave,
Dave Hooton said:Elsewhere you state "my actual text includes square brackets and numbers (apart from verse references)". This would say there is a necessary formatting to distinguish verses, which is not dissimilar to the 31,102 square bracket verse references in a Personal Book bible. Does it handle unique pericopes, chapter headings (or non-bible text in general)? Can it distinguish and/or format "red letter" Words of Christ?
No, it doesn't have headings, footnotes, or red letter. It is just a plain text document. I've just used square brackets similar to how the ESV does in Mk 16:9, as an example.
0 -
Hi Dave,
Sorry for responding to this in two different messages, I am still not totally familiar with how this forum works. The format of it seems to be a lot more formal, with robo checks and no like button, so it is just taking a minute. Anyway...Dave Hooton said:your search for random references implies that the PB does not have milestones for every verse e.g.when I type Luke 3 it brings me to Luke 2:14 because it is the nearest milestone in the PB.
I see. And the milestones are obtained with the [[@Bible format. Is that correct?
Dave Hooton said:The best way to resolve this is to upload your docx file (or a sample of it) to the forum by using the paperclip icon. Ensure that it is intended to be a bible, or clarify what it is intended to be e.g. Bible Notes.
This is the first few verses of the ESV, but this is the exact same format as my own text. To upload it, I exported it to a docx and imported it as is:
Gen. 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen. 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen. 1:3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.0 -
Kristin said:
Hi DAL,
DAL said:So what’s so special about your Bible that other Bibles don’t have? Is it your own translation?
Ya, it is my own translation. I still see value in, and regularly use, published Bibles, but I have been working on my translation for years and have poured my sweat and blood into it. So it is important to me.
I see! Well, hopefully something can be improved so you can have it the way you want it 👍😁👌
DAL
0 -
Thank you, DAL.
0 -
Kristin said:
I see. And the milestones are obtained with the [[@Bible format. Is that correct?
Correct
Kristin said:This is the first few verses of the ESV, but this is the exact same format as my own text. To upload it, I exported it to a docx and imported it as is:
Gen. 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen. 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen. 1:3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.The format needed for a PB bible is:
[[@Bible:Gen. 1:1]] 1 {{field-on:bible}}In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.{{field-off:bible}}
[[@Bible:Gen. 1:2]] 2 {{field-on:bible}}The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.{{field-off:bible}}
[[@Bible:Gen. 1:3]] 3 {{field-on:bible}}And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.{{field-off:bible}}Word can format the verse numbers 2 and 3 as a superscript per ESV. It can also handle straight quotes to curly quotes.
The period after Gen is not generally used, but I think it will be ignored.
Bible text must be inside {{field-on:bible}....{{field-off:bible}} so it can be found in a Bible Search.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Kristin said:
I've just used square brackets similar to how the ESV does in Mk 16:9, as an example.
[SOME OF THE EARLIEST MANUSCRIPTS DO NOT INCLUDE 16:9–20.] will be OK as is.
[[Now when he....message by accompanying signs.]] (verse 9 to 20) will be OK as long as each verse is treated as bible text.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Hi Kristin! I'll bet it would be pretty easy to create an AppleScript to format your plain text document and save it as a .docx file. If you send me a small sample, I'll give it a try for you.Kristin said:It is able to be written in plain text, which works beautifully for me on a Mac. I use the native Text Edit,
0 -
DAL said:ReformedDoc said:
I am telling Nathan....
Great guy, but man did he ruined the Accordance forums and rubbed people the wrong way when he became “the face of Accordance!” I guess, as an employee, he’s required to do that; but Bad for business, though!
DAL
I used to be on there but i got not only banned, but had every single post I had ever made deleted. And most of my posts were good and helpful to others [H].
I do remember Kristen was one of the nicest people over there [H]
0 -
0
-
Mark Allison said:
Hi Kristin! I'll bet it would be pretty easy to create an AppleScript to format your plain text document and save it as a .docx file. If you send me a small sample, I'll give it a try for you.Kristin said:It is able to be written in plain text, which works beautifully for me on a Mac. I use the native Text Edit,
No need. Just open your TextEdit document in Pages, and then "Save AS" and choose Microsoft Word .docx format.
0 -
I meant I could create a script that would markup her document properly and then save it as a .docx file.
0 -
Kristin said:
So I need to keep using Accordance because of it's beautifully simplistic user bible, but after the suggestion of my friend, I decided to post here just in case I am missing something.
I have never created a personal book for Logos, but from Dave Hooton's posts it looks pretty simple.
I say that as someone who has done computer programming in the past. To a user Logos appears more complex (in many ways) than other programs.
I still use Bibleworks (now obsolete and unavailable), a program that could import and export personal Bible text to and from a simple text file. So the process for Accordance sounds similar.
There are two suggestions I could offer you at this point.
First you need to think in terms of "workflow" to get this into Logos. You do not change your original document if it is the master copy for other things you are doing with it. The first step in a "text to Logos Bible PB" workflow would be to make a copy of your latest document. Then you would make the formatting modifications required by the Logos PBB. This could be done in many ways, and there is a lot of good help available here on the forum. Then finally, export that to the .docx file that Logos requires.
A second option would be to just continue using BOTH programs. There are methods available to link the two programs. Again I have never done this, but there are posts on both forums discussing how to link the programs using external or web links.
It should be possible and fairly simple to get both programs scrolling through Bible references together.
0 -
Mark Allison said:
I meant I could create a script that would markup her document properly and then save it as a .docx file.
Now that would be awesome if you could do that [H]
0 -
Mark Allison said:
Hi Kristin! I'll bet it would be pretty easy to create an AppleScript to format your plain text document and save it as a .docx file. If you send me a small sample, I'll give it a try for you.
Hi Mark,
Good to see you.
Thank you, and I will try to send you a message. This forum seems sort of archaic compared to the other forum. I did see your thread about requesting a like button etc, and someone said they are in the process of updating it this year. So that is good. Hopefully that ro-bo check will go away as it seems sort of intense for little replies.
Btw, on the old forum I could muli-quote from different people on the thread. Is there a way to do that here too? As of now I need to respond to each person individually.
Also, on the old forum you could just simply subscribe and be done with it, where as here I need to click "email me replies to this post" over and over and over every time I comment. Am I missing something? Is there away to just subscribe like the old forum?0 -
Kristin said:
Btw, on the old forum I could muli-quote from different people on the thread. Is there a way to do that here too? As of now I need to respond to each person individually.
Also, on the old forum you could just simply subscribe and be done with it, where as here I need to click "email me replies to this post" over and over and over every time I comment. Am I missing something? Is there away to just subscribe like the old forum?I'm new to these forums too, and I'd like to know the answers to those questions too!
0 -
John said:
Just open your TextEdit document in Pages, and then "Save AS" and choose Microsoft Word .docx format.
Hi John,
Thank you for the idea, but I actually tried that, but it didn't work since it didn't have "milemarkers" as that other individual mentioned. For sure a lot more complicated of a process in many ways compared to a User Bible.
User Bible:
1. Gen 1.1 is all that is needed before a verse to make it searchable and scrollable in parallel
2. no milemarkers needed
3. no html needed
4. txt can be uploaded without converting to the format of a program I don't even own
5. since there is no weird html, I can keep my text as easily usable for other purposes (which is so critical it might prevent me from doing this at all)0 -
Mark Allison said:
If you send me a small sample
Hi Mark,
I went to your profile and the possibility to message you is not an option. I think this might be a setting on your end? Could you try sending me a message and then I could just reply to it?
0 -
Kristin said:
muli-quote from different people on the thread. Is there a way to do that here too?
I do it all the time, but you have to manually edit, cut and paste. The reply button only pulls up the post you clicked REPLY on. The way I do it is not user friendly, and also virtually impossible on a phone or tablet.
On the topic of "Like" buttons, I always considered it infantile and immature to limit a persons responses in that way. Didn't that originate with Facebook? I refused to participate in any forum that had a "Like" button, but no "Dislike" button [:)]
The "Email me replies to this post" in my experience does the same thing as subscribing to the thread. You do not need to repeatedly click it. Its a toggle, either on or off, and at the top of the current page it toggles between email replies and stop emailing replies.
My only complaint about the current forum is that you cannot zoom/enlarge the text and have it re-format. You can only enlarge the entire page.
0 -
John said:Kristin said:
muli-quote from different people on the thread. Is there a way to do that here too?
I do it all the time, but you have to manually edit, cut and paste. The reply button only pulls up the post you clicked REPLY on. The way I do it is not user friendly, and also virtually impossible on a phone or tablet.
Hi John,
Thanks for clarifying, and it does sound like a sort of convoluted process. However, I think I understand, so I will do it here just as a test:
This is a test of quoting two different users like the other forum. For sure not as smooth, but I think this will work. I decided to use Mark as an example since we are both learning.Mark Allison said:I'm new to these forums too, and I'd like to know the answers to those questions too!
John said:On the topic of "Like" buttons, I always considered it infantile and immature to limit a persons responses in that way. Didn't that originate with Facebook? I refused to participate in any forum that had a "Like" button, but no "Dislike" button
That forum has a few options of like, confused, sad, or thanks. The forum's version of a dislike button is basically just not liking it. To be honest, I actually really liked this, as it was unambiguous. On sites with pure dislike buttons, there is no way to distinguish between disliking the post existing, vs disliking the content, but still appreciating the post. So I liked the sad button better, and then just not liking it in any fashion as expressing dislike. It seemed to work well. For sure better than here where your ONLY option is to respond.
0
