filter syntax for Last Updated field?

Andrew Loney said:

Thank you both. I searched the forum for this before asking, but did not find it.

It is a shame that such an obvious capability wasn't provided.

Well, by way of explanation, this field was added as an afterthought after we users begged them for some way to tell when we had last updated a resource. Since it wasn't built in from the beginning, it was not designed to have filtering capabilities. Perhaps if we beg again they'll add that for some future release. I don't think they realized how useful it could be to allow filtering by that field. On the other hand, that date is not necessarily the date that you bought a resource, which would have been the reason I'd want to filter by that field. I might want to show only the books I'd bought in a certain date range, for example. But those dates are the last time I've updated the resource, and the dates prior to when they added the feature cannot be relied on. So it's of limited use, only helpful to see what was recently updated from here on out, which is essentially what we were asking for.

Andrew Loney said:

Rosie Perera said:

Well, by way of explanation, this field was added as an afterthought

I appreciate your comments and am well aware that users have been begging for this ever since L4 first came out. I have a difficult time accepting library managment as an afterthought. A product like L4 with an emphasis on large numbers of books should include full featured, flexible library managment features. In my view, L3 in several ways did a better job of this. I had abilities such as viewing my licenses, bibliographies and locations of book/resource files, albeit not in one place as it should be. I've seen numerous posts asking for various pieces of what a library management system should include. We want to slice and dice, sort and filter, tag and categorize, and organize and keep track of our libraries to help us understand and manage the large number of resources that we have purchased. This should not be an afterthought.

Ok, I'm done ranting...

Whew! Open my mouth and I get a full firehose in it. Hereby shutting it again. It's not my feature to defend. Logos did it. Rant at them. Thanks.

BTW, I agree with you. I wasn't trying to defend Logos nor get you to accept the status quo. I was merely giving you some historical background which I now see you didn't need. Forgive me for trying to fill you in on why it ended up this way (which, if you note, I did agree is "of limited use"), which is all I was doing. You're right, the library management features are lacking some fundamental things. We shouldn't have to beg for things like this.

Andrew Loney said:

Sorry. My rant is not directed at you. I clearly don't have a good handle on proper forum discourse. Admittedly, your use of the word "afterthought" did evoke a desire to express my views regarding L4 library management, which I realized when I was done sounded like a rant (directed at Logos; not you). In fact, I have seen your comments in other threads and already knew that you would be largely in agreement with my comments. Please accept my humble apology for my failure to properly frame those comments and thank you for your valuable contributions to this forum and L4.

Apology accepted. Thanks.