BUG: Bible-based Ranges
The Bible picker In NAB shows:-
All the pre-defined OT ranges are incorrect.
Contrast with NRSV:
and ESV:
If Bible-based, why does ESV have Apocrypha ranges?
Now look at LHI:
The Apocrypha pre-defined range is incorrect. OT may be OK!
Note that I haven't examined all the bibles.
The other bug is that custom range names (Bible & Apocrypha, Paul's Letters) do not show their range.
Dave
===
Windows 11 & Android 13
Comments
-
Dave,
Good catch, I confirmed what you've got.JK
MacBookPro Retina 15" Late 2013 2.6GHz RAM:16GB SSD:500GB macOS Sierra 10.12.3 | iPhone 7 Plus iOS 10.2.1
0 -
Dave,
I didn't even notice that this had been introduced.... until now...
I can't remember reading it in any Beta Release notes and it's quite strange given Bradley's response on this issue (not in 4.0) in my wish list thread.
0 -
I can't remember reading it in any Beta Release notes and it's quite strange given Bradley's response on this issue (not in 4.0) in my wish list thread.
Yes! Who is experimenting?
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Who is experimenting?
Vincent!
0 -
Vincent!
Not it! I did assemble some data for better ranges, but I don't think development has had time to look at it yet. This is someone else's experiment.
0 -
Vincent!
Not it! I did assemble some data for better ranges, but I don't think development has had time to look at it yet. This is someone else's experiment.
There was a change made (as per a request by Vincent [:)]) that a single-Bible search use the ranges from that Bible. If you search just the BHS, you'll see the "Old Testament" range listed as Gen-2 Chron, which is the correct order for that Bible. However, the Search panel for BHS also shows an Apocrypha range (of just Esther), which is incorrect. It looks like this change may have introduced some bugs.
This change also doesn't take into account different canons (as requested in http://community.logos.com/forums/p/2293/17342.aspx).
0 -
This change also doesn't take into account different canons
That was why I labelled it an experiment[:D]
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Apologies Vincent. Though, I knew you had a hand in it somewhere
I'll be interested to see where this goes.
I had a similar thought to Dave. What happens with the ranges when I search Top Bibles? The definition of "Bible" is not the same for all of them... NJB/NRSV/NA27/BHS/LXX
0 -
I had a similar thought to Dave. What happens with the ranges when I search Top Bibles? The definition of "Bible" is not the same for all of them... NJB/NRSV/NA27/BHS/LXX
If you're searching more than one Bible, it should fall back to the default ranges you know and love from Beta 8. Only when one Bible is being searched does the reference range picker customise itself to that Bible.
0 -
I had a similar thought to Dave.
You must have caught my post before I changed it!
That does come down to the implied/explicit canon of each bible. But that would be overridden when you search a collection based on your canon (or the Logos default!). Note that Top Bibles comes from your Prioritized list.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave, I did read it before you changed it and then didn't notice the change. In my case, My top five bibles have different canons for the OT.
Bradley, my love for the Beta8 system ranges knows no bounds
0 -
It looks like this change may have introduced some bugs.
The major bugs should—I hope—be fixed in the current release. (There are still some minor issues where some Bibles will report ranges containing part or all of the Apocrypha (as defined by LDLS3) incorrectly; a full fix will have to wait until after 4.0.)
0
