Add ability to sort Basic Search by Resource Prioritization
SineNomine
Member Posts: 434 ✭✭✭✭✭
Add the ability for us to sort our search results in a Basic Search by resource in the order that we have *prioritized* our resources.
This would (finally) extend the effects of Prioritization of resources into Basic Searches.
Why would users want this? Resources we have prioritized are, in general, resources we are interested in. For example, if I do a Basic Search for "grace" in All Passages in All Resources with Type:"Systematic Theology", the results I'm most interested in are probably in the systematic theologies I've prioritized.
(Note that, right now, "Ranked" sorts the results according to an algorithm that considers which result is most likely to be the one we are looking for, and "By Resource" sorts them by resources in alphabetical order by resource title, while "By Count" sorts according to the number of hits in each resource.)
This would (finally) extend the effects of Prioritization of resources into Basic Searches.
Why would users want this? Resources we have prioritized are, in general, resources we are interested in. For example, if I do a Basic Search for "grace" in All Passages in All Resources with Type:"Systematic Theology", the results I'm most interested in are probably in the systematic theologies I've prioritized.
(Note that, right now, "Ranked" sorts the results according to an algorithm that considers which result is most likely to be the one we are looking for, and "By Resource" sorts them by resources in alphabetical order by resource title, while "By Count" sorts according to the number of hits in each resource.)
Tagged:
21
Comments
-
This is a great suggestion that makes a lot of sense.0
-
I'm not sure it will improve presentation of results unless one is searching resources that are normally prioritized e.g. Bibles, Lexicons, Encyclopedias, Commentaries. If there is a mixture of resources in the results, it is not clear how they should be sorted with respect to prioritized and unprioritized resources.0
-
@mailmedav-48 I think you may have misunderstood the suggestion. I am not asking for a change to the present options. I am asking for an additional option. The fact that the additional option I am requesting would not be useful for *all* searches is no reason to object to it, since adding it would not affect any of the present options. Indeed, the present options are not all useful for all searches either.
As to how the requested option would work, it is very simple: they would ordered "by resource in the order that we have *prioritized* our resources." Resources we have not prioritized would appear after the resources we have prioritized and they would appear in the program's default order of prioritization (different for Logos and Verbum). In that respect, this option would function in the same way that the Commentaries section of a Passage Guide functions when one uses the "Priority" facet.0 -
@SineNomine I understand that it is a new option, but I have doubts...
For resources that are normally prioritised (e.g. having an Index that Commentaries have) the sort order could be as you describe. It is also possible that English Bibles will list before Encyclopedias, then Concordances, then Dictionaries, then Greek Lexicons, Hebrew Lexicons, Aramaic Lexicons followed by Greek Bibles and Hebrew Bibles, and then Commentaries, followed by ... i.e. in the exact order of my Prioritization list. But what order would unlisted Bibles and Lexicons follow?
And what about the vast majority of resources that only have a Page number Index or do not have an Index?
So, it could work well for a Basic Search of my Commentaries or Bible Dictionaries, but I'm not sure it would work for All Resources, where I might begin to prefer Ranked order!0 -
@mailmedav-48 For searches where you'd prefer Ranked order, just use it. I still think that the objection to adding a prioritized facet would only be useful some of the time has no value. The existing facets are also all of limited use. For one thing, none of them give me what I want when what I want is results organized in the order I have prioritized my resources.0
-
@SineNomine You haven't answered the questions I have raised, nor understood my mention of Ranked judging by the dismissive remark (I don't use Ranked).
What exactly do you mean/expect by "results organized in the order I have prioritized my resources"? What resources have you prioritized?0
