Vote for British vs. American spellings in search | Logos so that, as users, our searches don't accidently exclude large chunks of our libraries. Make "savior" search for "savior OR saviour" and vice versa.
Wow. I just assumed this was standard practice to include both spellings, but I guess not.
Voting now
I voted. Seems like it should have been this way from the beginning
The correct spelling [A] gets me 156,622 results in 76,757 articles in 6,377 resources, whereas the American spelling gets me 106,351 results in 62,589 articles in 6,685 resources. Still a 60:40 ratio. This is quite different from armour and armor or colour and color. Very interesting.
What surprises me is how long it has taken to get some others to understand the depth of the issue ... and that Logos had not solved the issue when they upgraded the search interface . . . With a few notable exceptions, it seems as if there is a disconnect between those who understand the data and those who understand the functions.
Thanks for this neighbour I voted.
The correct spelling gets me 156,622 results in 76,757 articles in 6,377 resources
Sounds like a gray area to me, or is it grey? At any rate, I voted.
Now this is something I'd like to see AI used to address - making the search feature smart enough that the user doesn't have to worry about differences in spelling conventions. In my perfect world, it wouldn't just handle difference between contemporary British and American spellings, but would handle archaic spellings as well. Just gave it an upvote.
AI does address this. It's hard to say how perfectly it solves the problem, but it certainly does address it. All of these searches are run with precise search. AI does not provide a total count of results provided, which is understandable being as it functions in a fundamentally different way.
For me, the times that I am looking for savior, saviour, saveour, salveor, savioure, saveor, salvator, or sauveur are the times that I am likely running a complex, precise search. The mere volume of results against a simple search shows why I would use it only if I were creating temporary files to run merges against.
I agree with the problem and the need for a solution. In no way did I intend to imply otherwise. Smart search cannot replace precise search in my view. Certainly there are many uses for it, but one will have questions that are most directly answered via precise search.
for savior, saviour, saveour, salveor, savioure, saveor, salvator, or sauveur
It took me 4 tries of arguing with AI over it's answer before I got the incomplete list I used. First, it gave me an etymological version with the three major variants. Then it gave me more minor variants but dropped a major one. Then, it gave me a list dropping the forms that were the early forms of adopting the word from Latin and French. Finally, I got the list shown with a note that it omitted many variants that occurred before spelling was standardize. In short, AI showed it usual propensity to be unable to provide comprehensive lists. AI can be very useful but I would rather Logos scan its only library to find relevant forms.
I'm surprised that this is not how it works already. Voted.
Me too! This is a surprising. I also voted.
