Do you like Logos' Series or want to create your own?

Thanks Dave for bringing this to our attention. I was not aware of this feature which could be very useful.

The most basic, and perhaps most useful use of this field, would be to put your BHS and NA28 in the same series so that you can seamlessly move from the OT to the NT and vice-versa, without opening and additional resource.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/502960#Comment_502960

The most basic, and perhaps most useful use of this field, would be to put your BHS and NA28 in the same series so that you can seamlessly move from the OT to the NT and vice-versa, without opening and additional resource.

I love that idea Mark. Thanks for sharing.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/502960#Comment_502960

The most basic, and perhaps most useful use of this field, would be to put your BHS and NA28 in the same series so that you can seamlessly move from the OT to the NT and vice-versa, without opening and additional resource.

This is awesome! They pretty much snuck that in without much fanfare, but it's the serial associations that Libronix used to have, about which people complained bitterly when they were missing from Logos 4 when that was rolled out.

Thank you, Logos!

I've already been fixing up some of the inconsistent or missing series metadata in my library, and am glad to have this feature.

Next I wish they'd allow us to add our own cover images for non-PB books to fix missing or ugly ones such as John Bright's History of Israel:

Here's what it's supposed to look like:

Paul N

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503071#Comment_503071

This is a really good thing and thanks for sharing Dave!

I can update the "old American Commentary Series" that did not show resources in the ACNT/ACOT

http://community.logos.com/forums/t/67945.aspx

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503242#Comment_503242

I guess this would also be useful for creating your own Classic Commentary and Studies series for different books of the Bible, etc. if you are so inclined!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503246#Comment_503246

I guess this would also be useful for creating your own Classic Commentary and Studies series for different books of the Bible, etc. if you are so inclined!

That would actually be a bad idea, although you could certainly put them in the same collection. Series are serial, whereas collections are parallel (hence collections are used in the parallel resource menu). So, for commentaries, think about how you might lay the books out logically — side by side (parallel), or one after the other (series). Here's what I mean:

An example of books that belong side-by-side (i.e. in parallel), because they cover the same material

Cheyne's The Book of Psalms — Dickson's Explication of the Psalms — Horne's Commentary on the Psalms

An example of books that belong one after the other (i.e. in series), because they cover distinct material

Cheyne's Book of Psalms Volume 1
|
Cheyne's Book of Psalms Volume 2

Series are great because if you're looking at one book in the series, and try and go to a reference that's not in that book, then Logos will find that reference in another book in the same series. So if you're in the WBC commentary on Genesis, and you try to switch to Exodus, Logos will switch to the WBC volume on Exodus. Likewise, if you're in Cheyne's Books of Psalms: Vol 1, and switched to Psalm 150, then Logos will seamlessly switch to volume 2.

But if you changed the series of Cheyne's two volumes to Classic Commentaries on the Psalms, then Logos would no longer be able to automatically switch you to volume 2 if you tried to access a psalm that wasn't in volume 1. In fact, Logos would get quite confused as to which on the many commentaries on Psalms it should now switch to, and you'd get switched to an apparently random book in that series, rather than the volume you actually want.

So custom series is a very useful feature, but if you mess with it, you can break things. Perhaps that's why Logos took so long to implement it.

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503249#Comment_503249

Agreed Mark. I misunderstood how "series" worked!

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503246#Comment_503246

I guess this would also be useful for creating your own Classic Commentary and Studies series for different books of the Bible, etc. if you are so inclined!

I think Mark showed very instructively how it makes sense that various commentaries on the same book shouldn't be in a series, but rather in a collection. What you could do, for example, is make your own "MyPremiumAuthor'sNTCommentary" - maybe your preferred author has commented on Romans in NIVAC, on 1 Corinthians in NAC and on 2nd Cor in TNTC, on Galatians in NICNT and on Eph in ZEC...

Alan Macgregor

Series are known as Serial Associations in Logos 3 and you could create your own in addition to the ones created by Logos. Thanks to v5.1 you can now create your own Series, or modify the Series name given by Logos.

The most basic, and perhaps most useful use of this field, would be to put your BHS and NA28 in the same series so that you can seamlessly move from the OT to the NT and vice-versa, without opening and additional resource.

At long last!!

BTW

Bouquets to Logos team. [^] [B] [D] [^] [G] [pi] [C] in any order. [:D]

There is other stuff which has been fixed/improved/added in 5.1 (at least in Mac)

CopyBibleVerses - Spacing fixed so that Mark 1:1-2,4 has a space between the verses if they are copied in paragraph mode.
Clippings - now copy in default font and size.
Auto Crash Logs - offer to post logs on re-opening after a crash.

Every blessing

Alan

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503253#Comment_503253

ok ... i guess i'm confused on Paul's point. On my Libronix, i can create a 'custom' commentary set of my favorite authors (those agreeing with me, of course). Then I keep a single commentary tab that follows my Bible, it refreshingly finding the best authors as i study (and mirroring back my well developed guesses).

(Actually Libby doesn't. But maybe L5 does).

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503276#Comment_503276

ok ... i guess i'm confused on Paul's point. On my Libronix, i can create a 'custom' commentary set of my favorite authors (those agreeing with me, of course). Then I keep a single commentary tab that follows my Bible, it refreshingly finding the best authors as i study (and mirroring back my well developed guesses).

(Actually Libby doesn't. But maybe L5 does).

See if this helps Denise. http://www.logos.com/support/logos5/collections

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503276#Comment_503276

ok ... i guess i'm confused on Paul's point. On my Libronix, i can create a 'custom' commentary set of my favorite authors (those agreeing with me, of course). Then I keep a single commentary tab that follows my Bible, it refreshingly finding the best authors as i study (and mirroring back my well developed guesses).

(Actually Libby doesn't. But maybe L5 does).

Yes, although whether it's a good idea is another question, because what you're calling a "'custom' commentary set" will overwrite Logos' built in series, which may not be what you want. (So if you added the WBC commentary on Exodus to your series, that would take it out of the WBC series, which would mean that you couldn't scroll into Exodus from the WBC commentary on Genesis).

But it's done through series, not collections (despite Lynden's link).

More importantly for you, perhaps, you can do it in Libronix, too. It's called "Serial Resource Association" there. It's been four years since I used L3, but I remember it being fairly straightforward to set up. It's on Tools/Library Management.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503278#Comment_503278

Well, I tried Lynden's idea along with the L5 new series functionality. Best I can figure neither work (Paul's idea). I put an Isaiah volume from Continental with an AYB Mark volume (both being off the wall-ish). Then opened the Isaiah volume and typed in a Mark reference. It didn't know what to do, whether a collection or series.

Edit:

Just saw your answer, Mark. I just tried adding a test series to both L3 and L5; neither could move from Isaiah to Mark in the same window. Or I'm doing something wrong! I regularly use the series/parallel in L3 to manage L3's inability to match up multi-book commentaries with 1-book commentaries. Probably I'm a little biased, but the L3 approach is considerably more manageable (compared to the new L5 series).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503283#Comment_503283

I put an Isaiah volume from Continental with an AYB Mark volume (both being off the wall-ish). Then opened the Isaiah volume and typed in a Matthew reference.

Just saw your answer, Mark. I just tried adding a test series to both L3 and L5; neither could move from Isaiah to Mark in the same window. Or I'm doing something wrong!

If you have only have a Matthew and Isaiah commentary in your series, it's not going to navigate to Mark... ;-)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503284#Comment_503284

Ok, Mark. You're being graciously patient. But even if I had a series with every book in the Bible (but varying commentaries, AYB, WBC, etc ... the best of the best), it wouldn't work, right?

I'd think that'd be what most pastors would want? A critical series (best of best), a pastoral series (best of best), etc. I'm just opining, but some of these commentaries somehow manage to really jump the tracks. I was in AYB's Mark and finally had to call for help from WBC.

Armin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/502960#Comment_502960

The most basic, and perhaps most useful use of this field, would be to put your BHS and NA28 in the same series so that you can seamlessly move from the OT to the NT and vice-versa, without opening and additional resource.

That's great for people who know the original languages. Do you have a recommendation what OT and which NT interlinear resources are the most similar and most suitable to put into a series? Does the name of the series matter?

Armin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503285#Comment_503285

But even if I had a series with every book in the Bible (but varying commentaries, AYB, WBC, etc ... the best of the best), it wouldn't work, right?

On the contrary, that would work. It would take those commentaries out of their existing series, and into the new custom series. If your custom series consisted of WBC on Genesis, and NICOT on Exodus and PtW on Leviticus, then Logos would move seamlessly from one to the other as you entered the new reference in the reference box (either by typing in it, or by linking it to a bible, or by selecting 'send hyperlinks here' and clicking).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503296#Comment_503296

That's great for people who know the original languages. Do you have a recommendation what OT and which NT interlinear resources are the most similar and most suitable to put into a series? Does the name of the series matter

In Logos 5, then the Lexham Greek-English Interlinear New Testament and the Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible would be the most appropriate to put into a series. The name of the series doesn't matter, so long as it doesn't clash with anything else. To avoid unintentional clashes, it may be worth appending your initials or some other indicator to the name of the series. (That would also make it easier to find custom series in your library.) I've called mine OT and NT Interlinears (Custom), and OT and NT Original Language Texts (Custom).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503342#Comment_503342

You're right! I guess the books have to be contiguous. (Not Isaiah > Mark). But I notice you have to do the assignment all at once (e.g. the series field doesn't show up for a resource to be added to another series). That could be painful. I'll try out Libronix.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503347#Comment_503347

But I notice you have to do the assignment all at once (e.g. the series field doesn't show up for a resource to be added to another series).

You should see Set series, click it and type in a name. Make sure it matches the series name to which it is being added.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503347#Comment_503347

You're right! I guess the books have to be contiguous. (Not Isaiah > Mark).

The books don't have to be contiguous. You can have a series that just contains Isaiah and Mark, then type Mark 12 in the Isaiah commentary, and it will jump to Mark.

But I notice you have to do the assignment all at once (e.g. the series field doesn't show up for a resource to be added to another series).

As Dave said, you don't have to do the assignment all at once (but I'm not sure I understand what you said in the parentheses).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503436#Comment_503436

OK ... thanks Dave and Mark. I'm not too swift. The series label on the info box isn't labeled unless you have more than 1 selected (though experienced users would know to hover the mouse over ?-circle to see what the item is).

In business!!

This is great. I put one of the 'best commentaries' resources in the icons at the top and now can pop open the Best Commentaries series as needed. Whoo hoo!! Life is good (in addition to the wobbly LEB speaker).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503440#Comment_503440

The series label on the info box isn't labeled unless you have more than 1 selected

On Windows, there's a 'Set series' text if you have only one resource selected, or the existing series name with a pencil if one is already specified. Is that not what you see?

SteveF

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503440#Comment_503440

The series label on the info box isn't labeled unless you have more than 1 selected

Well done--that detail stumped me for a bit also.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503455#Comment_503455

Mark ... mine's a little different. I tried to upload a screen shot using the paperclip but nothing happened (twice).

Where you have 'Set Series', I have the name of the series (e.g. Word Biblical Commentary) and a little help circle; no other clue. Similarly where you select 2 volumes, there's no clue other than 'Clear user series' in very faint grey.

I'm guessing you're not selecting a resource that Logos already assigned a series name? Just guessing.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503477#Comment_503477

Where you have 'Set Series', I have the name of the series (e.g. Word Biblical Commentary) and a little help circle; no other clue. Similarly where you select 2 volumes, there's no clue other than 'Clear user series' in very faint grey.

I'm guessing you're not selecting a resource that Logos already assigned a series name? Just guessing.

I uploaded two pics.

The top one shows what I see when I have one resource selected that has no series. It shows "Set series" as a hyperlink.
The lower one shows what I see when I have a resource selected that already has a series (or multiple resources all with the same series). It shows the current series, with a pencil icon indicated that you can edit the field (just like tags). The pencil icon is the clue.
If I select multiple resources that aren't all in the same series, I get a "Set series for all" hyperlink, but I didn't upload a screenshot for that.

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503455#Comment_503455

On Windows, there's a 'Set series' text if you have only one resource selected, or the existing series name with a pencil if one is already specified. Is that not what you see?

Same display on Mac

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503345#Comment_503345

In Logos 5, then the Lexham Greek-English Interlinear New Testament and the Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible would be the most appropriate to put into a series. The name of the series doesn't matter, so long as it doesn't clash with anything else. To avoid unintentional clashes, it may be worth appending your initials or some other indicator to the name of the series. (That would also make it easier to find custom series in your library.) I've called mine OT and NT Interlinears (Custom), and OT and NT Original Language Texts (Custom).

I finally got around to doing this and I love it! It is amazing. I would highly recommend this to others. Thanks again Mark.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503345#Comment_503345

In Logos 5, then the Lexham Greek-English Interlinear New Testament and the Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible would be the most appropriate to put into a series. The name of the series doesn't matter, so long as it doesn't clash with anything else. To avoid unintentional clashes, it may be worth appending your initials or some other indicator to the name of the series. (That would also make it easier to find custom series in your library.) I've called mine OT and NT Interlinears (Custom), and OT and NT Original Language Texts (Custom).

Good idea to add (Custom) to our series names. I'm going to start that habit as of now, though I've already made some edits and have forgotten what they were. I did fix up all the "Cultural Exegesis" books from Baker (Entertainment Theology, Everyday Theology, God in the Gallery, Hip-Hop Redemption, Reframing Theology and Film, and Reviewing Leadership) with a series, but I can't remember what else. (reminds me of 1 Cor 1:16)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503908#Comment_503908

Good idea to add (Custom) to our series names. I'm going to start that habit as of now, though I've already made some edits and have forgotten what they were. I did fix up all the "Cultural Exegesis" books from Baker (Entertainment Theology, Everyday Theology, God in the Gallery, Hip-Hop Redemption, Reframing Theology and Film, and Reviewing Leadership) with a series, but I can't remember what else. (reminds me of 1 Cor 1:16)

I latched on to that idea after Mark originally mentioned it because I have a great "forgetter". [;)]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503915#Comment_503915

I have a great "forgetter".

Me too! Which reminds me (yes things do sometimes remind me of other things in spite of my fading memory) that last month on the Anagrammy Awards forum which I participate in, it was my turn to pose the monthly challenge. Since I forgot, until the month was almost over, that it was my turn, I chose as the challenge to anagram the following quote (including the author's name):

"I've a grand memory for forgetting." (Robert Louis Stevenson)

My best attempt at it was:

Aged over forty, urgent moments regress far into oblivion.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503920#Comment_503920

I have a great "forgetter".

Me too! Which reminds me (yes things do sometimes remind me of other things in spite of my fading memory) that last month on the Anagrammy Awards forum which I participate in, it was my turn to pose the monthly challenge. Since I forgot, until the month was almost over, that it was my turn, I chose as the challenge to anagram the following quote (including the author's name):

"I've a grand memory for forgetting." (Robert Louis Stevenson)

My best attempt at it was:

Aged over forty, urgent moments regress far into oblivion.

Wow Rosie I have been educated. I didn't even know there was such an awards forum for anagrams. But I was impressed at yours here. That's why your mind is so sharp! [;)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503345#Comment_503345

So, is there any chance that resources could be put in multiple series in L5 sometime soon? Presumably, some kind of comma separated list added in the same way would be appropriate syntax, and would allow what we all want.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/506415#Comment_506415

So, is there any chance that resources could be put in multiple series in L5 sometime soon? Presumably, some kind of comma separated list added in the same way would be appropriate syntax, and would allow what we all want.

I very much doubt that will happen, because the whole point of series is that they tie books together so that you can navigate from one to the other. If a book was in multiple series, Logos wouldn't know where to navigate to.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/506415#Comment_506415

So, is there any chance that resources could be put in multiple series in L5 sometime soon? ... and would allow what we all want.

As you may know from the ? tip "A resource can only be in one series at a time" and Mark has outlined a reason for this restriction. Not that it is impossible to do what you want but I wonder why you want it?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/506587#Comment_506587

I guess a resource being in multiple series makes sense when it is the target for those series.

Consider, two series, the "interlinear original language bible series", containing the NA27 NT and a Hebrew interlinear OT; and the "interlinear Greek Bible series, containing a Greek OT interlinear and the interlinear NA27.

Opening a tab with a Greek OT interlinear and moving to the NT, should move to NA27, as should opening a tab with the Hebrew interlinear OT and moving to the NT.

The problem, rightly, is when in the NA27 interlinear, and moving to the OT. There are two choices. One is to open two tabs, one for the Hebrew and one for the Greek OT. Another is to throw a pop up box or something to ask which series should be selected. I would prefer the first. Isn't this more like what Logos 3 used to do?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507166#Comment_507166

The problem, rightly, is when in the NA27 interlinear, and moving to the OT. There are two choices. One is to open two tabs, one for the Hebrew and one for the Greek OT. Another is to throw a pop up box or something to ask which series should be selected. I would prefer the first. Isn't this more like what Logos 3 used to do?

Logos 3 had Serial Resource Associations instead of Series, but had the same restriction that a resource could only have on Serial Association.

In my opinion, sprouting tabs or popping up confirmations, would both be annoying. A far better solution would be to create two series, each with a different NT interlinear. I have three Greek NT interlinears (Lexham, Lexham [SBL] and NA27) so this would certainly be possible.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507170#Comment_507170

The problem, rightly, is when in the NA27 interlinear, and moving to the OT. There are two choices. One is to open two tabs, one for the Hebrew and one for the Greek OT. Another is to throw a pop up box or something to ask which series should be selected. I would prefer the first. Isn't this more like what Logos 3 used to do?

Logos 3 had Serial Resource Associations instead of Series, but had the same restriction that a resource could only have on Serial Association.

In my opinion, sprouting tabs or popping up confirmations, would both be annoying. A far better solution would be to create two series, each with a different NT interlinear. I have three Greek NT interlinears (Lexham, Lexham [SBL] and NA27) so this would certainly be possible.

Yes, this is the solution for this particular example I had adopted too. It is not a general solution, however. A word commentary, for example, which one wants in both the "word commentary series", and in one's "best commentary" series, and perhaps in one's "most technical commentary" series.

Yes, you are right about L3 and serial resource associations - but L3 also had the keyword associations (or whatever they were called), where when you clicked on a word, you could specify how many resources would open up in which the word would be "looked up" in. That established the principle of opening multiple resources/tabs when needed.

I'm getting the feeling however, that I am not going to win many people over on this particular issue.

A totally different change I would like which is related to being able to construct one's "favourite commentary series" is the ability to break up resources into independent resources. I am thinking, for example, of freeing Carson's Matthew commentary from the EBC resource, so that it could be included in such a series, without having to include the EBC Mark and Luke commentaries in such a series. (It would also be useful in defining certain collections as well, as I have argued on previous occasions - although not for some years.)

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507196#Comment_507196

A totally different change I would like which is related to being able to construct one's "favourite commentary series" is the ability to break up resources into independent resources. I am thinking, for example, of freeing Carson's Matthew commentary from the EBC resource, so that it could be included in such a series, without having to include the EBC Mark and Luke commentaries in such a series.

This would probably be difficult / impossible for Logos to do without express permission from the publisher.

I could see, for example, that it might make referencing it (footnotes) a challenge.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507196#Comment_507196

Yes, you are right about L3 and serial resource associations - but L3 also had the keyword associations (or whatever they were called), where when you clicked on a word, you could specify how many resources would open up in which the word would be "looked up" in. That established the principle of opening multiple resources/tabs when needed.

L3's feature was calling keylinking. In L4/5 that same feature is called Prioritizing.

The difference in implementation is that (as you point out) in L3 you could open multiple resources in one click, whereas in L4/5 it takes extra clicks. But keylinking only worked for lookups and did not relate to Serial Resource Associations. And keylinking never opened different resources when scrolling, only when clicking. That can already be achieved in L4/5 through advanced prioritisation (although it takes extra click to open multiple resources).

Keylinking = Prioritization
Serial Resource Association = Series
Parallel Resource Association = Collections

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507199#Comment_507199

A totally different change I would like which is related to being able to construct one's "favourite commentary series" is the ability to break up resources into independent resources. I am thinking, for example, of freeing Carson's Matthew commentary from the EBC resource, so that it could be included in such a series, without having to include the EBC Mark and Luke commentaries in such a series.

This would probably be difficult / impossible for Logos to do without express permission from the publisher.

I could see, for example, that it might make referencing it (footnotes) a challenge.

Probably not if they made it user doable in their own library. Also, I am not sure why the footnote references would need to change.

This really would be a great user-value added feature for defining the series and collections we actually want. I would also include the ability to break out dictionary / encyclopedia entries and papers from journals.

Without this there is no way to collect ... say ... all (and only) the words by D.A. Carson or Leon Morris or whoever in my library into one collection.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507231#Comment_507231

Also, I am not sure why the footnote references would need to change.

Sorry.

I was thinking that if someone wanted to quote from a particular page in the existing EBC volume and include a footnote showing page number then this would probably need to be maintained - in some way - if the EBC volume were split up.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507196#Comment_507196

A totally different change I would like which is related to being able to construct one's "favourite commentary series" is the ability to break up resources into independent resources. I am thinking, for example, of freeing Carson's Matthew commentary from the EBC resource, so that it could be included in such a series, without having to include the EBC Mark and Luke commentaries in such a series.

This is a use I have contemplated and you could certainly grab the "best" individual volumes and combine them into your own series at the expense of breaking++ the (many) original series. Then you might replace the weaker NAC (for example) volumes with independent** volumes or produce a new series from independent volumes on Romans, Revelation etc.

++ you could do this in Libronix and maintain the original association(s) but with unpredictable results.

** these could be individual volumes you purchased from a Logos series or volumes that don't belong to a series.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/506423#Comment_506423

I very much doubt that will happen, because the whole point of series is that they tie books together so that you can navigate from one to the other.

That is certainly one use of series. I can think of at least two more:

to get one line in the Prioritization list, instead of many.
to simply keep track of the series the books were actually published as part of.

And the thing is, some books do belong to multiple series. The AYBRL includes three or four minor series within it (Charlesworth, A Marginal Jew, an archaeology one, and perhaps Brown), and I recently discovered three books by Hinson that form an Old Testament Introduction series, while also being part of a TEF Study Guide series (which, to complicate things further, was later renamed to SPCK International Study Guides).

Logos practice is to always tag with the larger series when there's a conflict. That means that until 5.1, one had to choose between prioritizing the whole AYBRL in one place, giving some books the 'wrong' priority, or cluttering up the list by prioritizing book by book. Now, finally, I can make the minor series into Logos series, and improve the Priority list, but the price is that filtering and sorting by the larger series is broken instead (which can partly be fixed with a mytag). So I for one very much wish we could have multiple series.

As for "If a book was in multiple series, Logos wouldn't know where to navigate to", that can't be any harder to code for than to code for multiple Parallel Resources sets, can it? And we already have that. All that's needed (from the user's perspective) is a check box to mark the active series, just as we have a check mark to tell Logos whether to go to the next Bible or the next Greek Bible when we hit the right-arrow.

Oh, yes, I almost forgot. An interesting comment by Hayley on the Metadata page some days ago: "Regrettably, our series setup doesn’t like multiple series names, so I’ve had to leave out ‘Old Testament Introduction’ series for the time being" (italics mine).

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/503345#Comment_503345

Interesting thread.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507607#Comment_507607

That is certainly one use of series. I can think of at least two more:

Let me put it another way. That is the purpose for which the series feature was designed. The series feature makes other things possible (such as bulk prioritising, or library management), but that is not the primary purpose. I've learned not to fight against Logos by using features in ways other than which they've been designed, as it tends to have unforeseen consequences.

That's not to say I don't think it's a good idea to suggest changes. But I do think that the best changes are suggested when we understand the current implementation best - which is why I'm trying to explain why things are the way they are, and what might break if they were changed (and in response, you have improved the suggestion with a proposed UI change that would mitigate at least some of the problems - though I confess I remain unconvinced).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507665#Comment_507665

I've learned not to fight against Logos by using features in ways other than which they've been designed, as it tends to have unforeseen consequences.

I hear your caution. Can you give some examples?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/507691#Comment_507691

I hear your caution. Can you give some examples?

Using a custom Series for convenient mass prioritization can have unforeseen consequences:-

you can't know the preferred resource in a series of Greek lexicons or a series of Hebrew lexicons
likewise if you mix bibles & commentaries in a series.

This illustrates a misunderstanding of series as well as bad usage because a custom series of lexicons with the same word coverage is a Parallel collection whereas a series of one Greek lexicon and one Hebrew lexicon is proper use (Serial) and could be prioritized with more success.