As Bob has made so clear in some recent post regarding the cost of creating a digital work, we recognize that a huge portion of the cost of making digital works in Logos is creating links as well as typo repair from OCR. The links within Logos digital works are one of the main things that give them their value over paper-and-ink or web-based versions of the same work. HOwever, we often find that the linking is inconsistent (very well done in some places are not-done-at-all in others, Grudem's Systematic Theology is a good example of this) or incorrect (often verse references where the chapter is not provided is not correct, the tagger obviously was not reading the text around the reference and just guessed).
I therefore propose again a way that we, the users of Logos, could help defray the costs and improve the quality. I have two different types of proposals for this:
- Works not yet published: Active Logos users could read the text as scanned and formatted and then create keylinks and fix typos. If two or three Logos users are working on a single text, all corrections and link creations would have to be agreed upon by at least two of the users to go into the final version. Logos would then provide the works to the volunteers free-of-charge and perhaps a small unlock credit as a thank you. The user would get the benefit of being able to read the work and be a part of getting the book to market. It is obvious from forum involvement that there are a number of users willing to volunteer a lot of time to help make Logos better.
- Works already published:
Typos: When a critical number (3?) users propose the exact same typo fix, it should automatically be accepted and the digital file updated. This could be done without human intervention on Logos' side, allowing product improvement without significant cost to Logos. Also, perhaps a few users who have consistently proven to suggest quality typo suggestions could be invited to an MVP-like program where they could review typo suggestions and approve them or reject them. When 2 volunteer MVPs make the same determination on a typo suggestion, it would automatically be accepted or rejected. The MVPs could either do this out of sheer love for Logos or be given unlock credits for their services. This would be much cheaper than hiring Logos employees to do this work. The quality of the output would likely be the same or better than if a Logos employee did it. Logos would save money and the quality of the product would be improved.
- Hyperlinks: This is the area I think has the greatest potential for improvement. Add a "Suggest link" option underneath the "Report typo" option on the right-click menu. If a critical number of users (2 or 3?) suggest the same link be created, it should automatically be adopted. Oftentimes, when a resources is referenced that I know is in my library but is not linked (either because it was just missed or because that resource was not available in Logos at the time of publication), I look it up anyway. That process takes about a minute. Very time consuming for a Logos employee, but free if you let users do it. Then if those suggestions are automatically accepted because a critical number of users suggested the same link (or because an MVP(s) as described above accepts it), we get better quality resources at minimal to know cost to Logos.
I hope that these suggestions or some variation on them can be implemented in the future by Logos to help decrease our costs to purchase books, to improve quality, and to develop an even more committed and involved Logos customer base.
