Notes Files Suggestion/PLEA

I would like the notes to be
searchable, added to the passage guide,

This we have in L4

be able connect a single note to more
than one passage,

This is my biggest need ... although with the search I think there is an inelegant workaround.

Bob

I agree in that I am not wanting another word processor.  It would only end up being a poor version with a lot of bloat that would slow loading.  

I agree, multiple font support is not necessary (except for other languages)... but why bother supporting different styles of fonts?  That just seems silly for a note taking system.

I do, however, think a simple bullet or numbering list would be useful.  Sometimes when taking notes, it is nice to write down short statement that you will later amplify into a full fledged outline in a word processor.  Bullet items, are convenient I think.

finally, is the plan to include all this in the upgraded Mac version with a simultaneous Windows & Mac launch?

I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible, using your own content.

I understand why you'd want them to be searchable (they will be), and exportable, etc. But I don't get why you'd need strong indent/outlining features, multiple font support (beyond setting the default, and for Greek/Hebrew), paragraph formatting, etc. Aren't these things better suited to your word processor?

Or are users wanting to create larger documents than I envision, inside the notes system?

(BTW, our notes are stored in XML right now, and are also exportable. Create a Note File Summary and then use the Export feature, or just open the notefile in a text editor -- though that's a power-user feature for people comfortable with XML.)

-- Bob

Bob, you know you're opening a can of worms here, by asking for what we want.

Notes are used in many ways by users. The two primary ways I use notes are to 1) help me remember stuff I discovered about a text that I may forget the next time I study it; 2) make little personal observations tied to a particular verse or text. The notes feature as currently implemented helps me do that second thing pretty well.

But it's more important to me to keep track of my study notes that go beyond simple personal observations. I want to remember how this NT passage is connected to an OT passage, how variations on noun and verb stems of a particular word are key to understanding this text, that author X made this interesting observation on this passage (include link), that there's a really cool sermon illustration that illuminates a key truth about this passage found in this resource (include link), that commentator X says this (include text/link?), and maybe: here are 5 reasons I differ with the translators' rendering of this passage.

I don't think you need to create a word processor. A simple interface for doing basic html-type coding would be enough. I'm looking at the top of the input interface for creating a post in this forum. It's enough for me (not that I need smilies!).

Thanks for listening!

Let me start by saying we ARE improving notes in the next release, and implementing many of the most commonly requested features.

I'd also like to better understand what you want to do with notes. Longtime newsgroup readers know that I am very reluctant to turn our notes feature into a full-featured word processor (because it feels like a slipperly slope to writing a full-featured word processor, which is a very big job and not our goal). 

I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible, using your own content.

I understand why you'd want them to be searchable (they will be), and exportable, etc. But I don't get why you'd need strong indent/outlining features, multiple font support (beyond setting the default, and for Greek/Hebrew), paragraph formatting, etc. Aren't these things better suited to your word processor?

Or are users wanting to create larger documents than I envision, inside the notes system?

(BTW, our notes are stored in XML right now, and are also exportable. Create a Note File Summary and then use the Export feature, or just open the notefile in a text editor -- though that's a power-user feature for people comfortable with XML.)

-- Bob

 

I agree that notes need not be a full-featured word processor.  I do, however, expect a few things:

1. Ability to set a default font (which can be changed as needed)
2. "Sticky" formatting which is to say that when you set the formatting it STAYS SET.  I tire of navigating away from a note only to find on return that it is a different size or a different font from what I had set.
3. Ability to link to more than one passage. (This could be problematic if its attempting to open up the same book to two different passages -- perhaps this could be accomplished by opening a new instance of the resource.  This isn't one of the "big ticket" items since I can make an additional link to the second passage.
4. Finer granularity in linking to non-versified resources.  Sometimes I link to a passage and am taken to the beginning of a page only to find that the passage I wanted is at the bottom of the page.
5. Could something be done about the entry of Hebrew?  I find that if I am to enter Hebrew in a passage I need to anticipate any English that might be entered thereafter and pre-enter it before entering the Hebrew or it just doesn't work.
6. Searching is a BIG item.  I am referring to being able to search all of one's notes and not simply a currently open file.  Sometimes I remember something I noted previously, but don't remember precisely which note file it was in.
7. Inter-note linking.  Sometimes I want to reference another note in another note file.  I would prefer to not need to either cite the name of the note file and the note ID or to copy the contents of the note into the current entry.

A lot of you have now added thoughts/suggestions on specific technology, but I've only seen a few on HOW you use notes, you know, the role notes files have in your use of Logos an/or study/preparation process, which is what Bob Prichett said he was interesting in understanding. I realize that this may have been addressed in the past, but Bob was asking for it and I think we should help him as best we can.

Personally I have a number of note files the two main ones are called Commentary and Quotes the others are related to specific subjects that I am looking at. The two main ones are always open and the others are open whilst I am working on them and are often not used again after I have finished the specific study. Having collected the information in a Logos notes file I export it to Word to produce a final output.

My most important note file is the commentary one here I collect my own personal observations on specific verses along with information copied and pasted from other sources either as I study a text or as I read a specific book. I tend to copy and paste any interesting observations about the texts and save them with the verse as input to future study.

The way that I use quotes is probably a bit strange because I effeciively use it as a way to highlight interesting parts of a book in much the same way as I underline in a hardcopy book. I actually cut and paste the text into the note file linking the note to the selected text. WIth the note file open this ensures that the text is highlighted the next time I view the book but it also means that I can browse the note file to remind myself of some of the interesting points made by a book. One feature that I would really like to see is the ability to collapse notes by actual book as this would significantly improve navigation of note files that span multiple books.

I appreciate that there is probably a better way to manage the highlighting/quotes within Logos but this system works well for me and gives me what I feel that I need.

When managing my commentary file, the main challenge I have is tidying up the notes. I tend to ad any new observations or text from other sources at the bottom of the file and make no real attempt to tidy the notes up. The main feature that I would like to see for this use is the simple export of multiple notes to a single word file by verse range i.e. Matthew 5-7 for the Sermon on the Mount.

Another great feature for me would be the ability to send the selected text to a designated notefile for the active Bible verse, this would really simplify the capturing of interesting observations in commentaries.

I have to admit this does seem a bit like surveying a group of people with a broken leg about how they walk. In other words the way we use Logos notes is a function of its capabilities, or lack thereof besides our personal styles.

The one thing that Logos does for me is to link a huge library to what I'm interested in at the moment either directly or indirectly (through searches) which is a big advantage over having physical books. The one thing it doesn't do with the same quality and usefulness as the rest of the program is to link my research findings on a topic or verse and make that research useful to me (printing, exporting, reorganizing, linking, searching).

I mentioned in another post that I use notes for a repository of research and personal observations. I then copy useful stuff to an external program when I'm actually going to present anything since the final form can be some combination of file, published document, slide show, or speech so no one set of presentation tools will ever be adequate. I would like the ability to select nodes in my notes tree and transfer all the material in that node and any indented nodes in one operation.

I'll give a hearty "second" to all of Jim's comments, in particular the first paragraph.  [:(]

I've tried on MANY occasions, over the years, to get Notes to "work" for me ... but I kept getting frustrated.  It wasn't that they would not fit "my style" - it was that I could not IMAGINE a "style" that they could be used for that would not involve multiple brick-wall encounters. [:S]

I think that the key to this is to get FOCUSED on what "the task" really is.  Then each suggestion can be evaluated against that paradigm.

LOGICALLY, there seems to me to be a clear dividing line, which Jim expressed and I'd like to further define.  That dividing line has stage(s) we might call "research" and "correlation" on one side, and stages that we might call "presentation" and "application" on the opposite side.  If we ask L to create something that works on both sides of the line, I think we'll just end up running in circles, and neither side will be adequately handled.  That's where we are now ... let's not just get a fancier version of confused. 

So, presuming that we agree conceptually on the distinctions between the two sides of the line, which one should be the prime focus of L's "new nifty notes" (NNN) ??  I think that's also a foregone conclusion ... the purpose of LIbronix is to help us study and learn ... it's NOT intended primarily as a visual-presentation platform (though it can be used that way, with a sufficiently-interested audience and a high-resolution projector).

THEREFORE, my strongest recommedation would be that "features" which would exists primarily to make things "look pretty" should be 86'd.  I'd far prefer to see L apply its talents and time to aiding me in my research and correlation.

OK, so where does THAT take us?  Well ...

RESEARCH is of course the process of utilizing L's tools and books to gather information into "interlinked baskets" that we will go back to later and sort through.  Of course, even though one often undertakes an initial study in one massive thrust, it is often the case that we will later go back to that same topic and add additional information &/or categories to it.  On the other hand, sometimes we have no such initial organized approach, but later on we decide to "collect" disparate notes and highlights together into a grouping that currently holds interest to us.

CORRELATION is the process of organizing the information into some coherent categories and sequence.  The same collection of bits of data can be correlated in many different ways ... thus, the results of our Research might yield, over the years, many different useful vignettes from different perspectives, with different teaching-goals.  So, we need to be able to have a way to leave the research in place, organized in whatever manner makes sense for the process of researching, and somehow, without disturbing that "orderly mess", have a way to reorganize bits of it into whatever pattern that fits our current task.

This need to reorganize-without-disturbing-the-original is the heart of the problem, in my view.  The simplest solution is to just make an extra copy of the entire research-collectiton, then hack and slash away the stuff that's not relevant to the current task, and finally organize the remainder into something that's amenable to porting to a DIFFERENT application, for "pretti-fying" (such as PowerPoint).

That copy+hack-n-slash method does work - it's how I usually do my own preparation - but it has two major flaws:   first, it often involves a LOT of material, especially if it includes extensive quotations from scripture or other sources.  This makes it just plain awkward to do.  The second flaw is:  if you want to add to or modify the research data at a later time, there is no "automatic" updating of the correlated results ... in fact, it's nearly impossible to figure out what research stuff is the "new' stuff, since completion of the original correlation task.

So, my strongest to-the-point request regarding NNN is that intense effort be made to allow for quick and easy and targetted links to be available at all levels, between all objects.  Of course, L is all about links!  However, those links don't "port" with a click-n-dragged selection when we paste it somewhere else.  That is, right-clicking on that copied entity does not bring up a menu similar to Libronix's.  Nor does double-clicking or hovering over it provide us with any additional information.  If we want to take THAT info (the linked stuff) with us to our Research-collection area, and later to our Correlation-worktable, we need to copy and paste it ALL!  Ooof.  Reminds me of moving out of a house.  Ya gotta take it ALL.

Additionally, we need a new layer of links that currently don't exist in Libronix ... ones that we build.  That is, we need to be able to link our notes ... our reseach data ... into customize chains of whatever sort we can imagine.  Then, we need links to link the links in different patterns, as we go through the Correlation process.  Huh.  I know, this sounds like gobbledegook, and sort of makes my head spin trying to write it out ... but I believe that this process is what we ACTUALLY DO, somewhat unconsciously and haphazardly, as we study and prepare, under the Spirit's direction.

I'm not too concerned, personally, about links to non-Libronix stuff such as external URL's.  Sure, it would be nice, but there is so much already IN Libronix, I believe that we must make research within that universe the top priority.  If for no other reason ... the multiple thousands of (wisely) invested dollars (many of us) have in this resource.  (I try not to think about this too much).   Besides ... incorporating outside links may well cause the "tightness" of whatever L might otherwise build to be mangled ... I'd rather be told to "add it myself, manually" re that other stuff, than to find that there's extra work, or additional limitations, in using the Libronix resources as a result of including the other stuff.

OK - that's as thorough an analysis that I can provide of the TASK's necessities.  It "shore wud bee grate" if a thousand replies came in with the words  - "Yeah - what he said" ... but I seriously doubt that will happen.  However, maybe we could try to discuss this for a while WITHOUT getting off into the "mechanics", because as Jim said before, everyone has their own style.

What we need are the tools to interlink all this info in ways that no one has yet imagined.  IMNSHO, it would be REALLY helpful if the L team could make a "list" of the KINDS of "linking" which are reasonably possible, and which kinds are a real time-consuming hair-pullilng bear of a job that we should try to avoid asking for.

Then, after those research+correlation "framework" capabilities are defined, I think it would be useful to start discussing the grab-bag of formatting options that would be useful.  Actually, THAT part of it is the SIMPLE part (I speak as a four-decades programmer at this point).  As someone already pointed out, a 12-year-old can write a word processor.  However it takes a Pritchett to write keylinking!

Summary:  I've tried to apply structured systems-analysis methods to this problem.  I hope that I've explained it well enough.  Thanks for being patient with the wordiness!

hyperlinks (* Very very  important *)

•  to Logos resources
• other notes,
• website pages,
• images,
• powerpoint presentations/excel on local machine,
• mp3 sermon files, movie files and other media
•  etc

A MUST imo.  +1 [Y] (Esp. the first 2)