Which one of these Collections Rules is Better?
I wrote a collection rule to find resources in my library on the Gospel of John. I later came across a rule for the same purpose in the wiki.
Which one of these rules, over time, will give me the best info?
64 John-
Type:Commentary AND (Subject:John,Title:(John,”First Series, Volume VII”,”First Series, Volume XIV”) ANDNOT Title:(Apocalypse,Epistles,Letter,”1 John”,”2 John”,”3 John”,Jude,Revelation))
OR
64 John (2)-
type:commentary AND (title:john,subject:john) ANDNOT (subject:”1 John” OR subject:”2 John” OR subject:”3 John” OR subject:”John, 1st” OR subject:”John, 2nd” OR subject:”John, 3rd” OR subject:revelation OR subject:”epistles of john”)
The first rule is giving me 32 hits in my library, and the second rule is giving me 30. The two additional volumes found by the first rule both seem to be applicable...they are:
Luther’s Works, Volume 30 and Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1.14: Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and Epistle to the Hebrews.
So the first rule looks better, but I'm not sure why; and as the library expands, I want to keep the better rule of the two.
Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.
Comments
-
Doc B said:
Which one of these rules, over time, will give me the best info?
The second one is mine, so that's better [;)].
Luther's Works Volume 30 is on the Catholic Epistles, not the Gospel of John. It should not be included in the collection.
NPF 1.14 is found by the second collection rule on my computer, so I'm not sure why it hasn't found it on yours. Perhaps you've wrongly identified the missing volume?
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
NPF 1.14 is found by the second collection rule on my computer, so I'm not sure why it hasn't found it on yours. Perhaps you've wrongly identified the missing volume?
My mistake...it is NPF 1.7 that is missing from your collection, not 1.14.
This is why I asked the question...I was sure there was a better answer than the one I had.
Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.
0 -
0
-
Mark, why your rule isn't catching NPF 1.7 is a mystery to me...John is in both the title and the description.
Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.
0 -
Doc B said:
Mark, why your rule isn't catching NPF 1.7 is a mystery to me...John is in both the title and the description.
Mark's rule excludes works that have "1 John" in the subject field, which makes the rule insufficient for works that cover both the Gospel and the Letter(s) of John.
I modified the rule to handle that situation:
type:commentary AND (subject:"N.T. John" OR ((title:john,subject:john) ANDNOT (subject:”1 John” OR subject:”2 John” OR subject:”3 John” OR subject:”John, 1st” OR subject:”John, 2nd” OR subject:”John, 3rd” OR subject:revelation OR subject:”epistles of john”)))
(The bold text is what I added)
This rule gets NPNF 1.7 and also Bob Utley's The Beloved Disciple’s Memoirs and Letters: The Gospel of John, I, II and III John.
Edit: fixed the matching parentheses in the rule (even though it was working with one missing)
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
Doc B said:
I wrote a collection rule to find resources in my library on the Gospel of John
I'm currently using this rule for John's Gospel:
((type:"bible commentary",monograph);(communitytag:john, title:john,"gospel of john","thru the bible mcgee", subject:john))-(title:apocalypse,"1, 2, 3","1-3","1 john","2 john","3 john","letters of john", publisher:perseus)
I know it's not as inclusive as it could be. I get weary trying to fine-tune collection rules and searches
Besides other descriptors (subject, title, author, etc.), the rule that you create is applied to the "front-matter" or description of the Logos resource, and this often produces false positives. Hypothetically, if resource metadata reflect more of a systematically designed taxonomy, perhaps the rules we use can be more accurate and precise.
edit: and less complex!
David
0 -
Todd Phillips said:
the rule insufficient for works that cover both the Gospel and the Letter(s) of John.
Good point Todd. Thanks for the modification.
0 -
Todd Phillips said:
Mark's rule excludes works that have "1 John" in the subject field, which makes the rule insufficient for works that cover both the Gospel and the Letter(s) of John.
Todd is right. Before I saw his reply, I amended the collection string myself:
type:commentary AND (title:john OR subject:john) ANDNOT ((subject:”1 John” OR subject:”2 John” OR subject:”3 John” OR subject:”John, 1st” OR subject:”John, 2nd” OR subject:”John, 3rd” OR subject:revelation OR subject:”epistles of john”) ANDNOT subject:"N.T. John")
It has exactly the same effect as Todd's improvement. Todd's is probably less confusing, as mine has a double negative.
In my case, this added ten additional commentaries:
- 1, 2, & 3 John: Crossway Classic Commentaries
- The Gospel and Letters of John, Volumes 1-3
- The Great Commentary of Cornelius à Lapide, Volume 6: S. John’s Gospel—Chaps. 12 to 21 and Epistles 1, 2, and 3
- Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1.7: St. Augustin: Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliloquies
- Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles
- A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters: The Word, the Christ, the Son of God
- The Writings of John: A Survey of the Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse
- The Beloved Disciple’s Memoirs and Letters: The Gospel of John, I, II, and III John
The first one should not be included, but that's caused by an error in Logos' subject tagging. You'll have to exclude it manually till Logos fixes the metadata.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Gold has been struck.
Thanks, folks. My Logos is better than it was an hour ago.
Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.
0 -
Doc B said:
Which one of these rules, over time, will give me the best info?
Incidentally, I just tested your first rule against my library, and found that it included 21 false positives:
- A Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John
- A Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John in the Form of Addresses
- An Exposition of the First Epistle General of John, Comprised in Ninety-Three Sermons, Vol. 1
- An Exposition of the First Epistle General of John, Comprised in Ninety-Three Sermons, Vol. 2
- An Exposition of the First Epistle General of St. John
- An Exposition of the First Epistle of John
- The First Epistle of John Expounded in a Series of Lectures
- The First Epistle of John, or, God Revealed in Life, Light, and Love
- The First Epistle of St. John with Exposition
- The First Epistle of St. John with Homiletical Treatment
- The First Epistle of St. John: A Contribution to Biblical Theology
- The First General Epistle of St. John the Apostle, Unfolded and Applied
- First, Second, and Third John (Interpretation)
- First, Second, and Third John: Evangelical Exegetical Commentary
- Gnomon of the New Testament, Volume 5
- I, II, III John: A Handbook on the Greek Text
- Luther’s Works, Volume 30
- The New Testament for English Readers: A Critical and Explanatory Commentary, Volume 2
- Notes for the Study and Exposition of 1st John
- The Spirit of Love; or, A Practical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of John
- The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John
It also did not include 10 resources it should have:
- The Beloved Disciple’s Memoirs and Letters: The Gospel of John, I, II, and III John
- The Gospel and Letters of John, Volume 1: Introduction, Analysis, and Reference
- The Gospel and Letters of John, Volume 2: Commentary on the Gospel of John
- The Gospel and Letters of John, Volume 3: Commentary on the Three Johannine Letters
- The Great Commentary of Cornelius à Lapide, Volume 6: S. John’s Gospel—Chaps. 12 to 21 and Epistles 1, 2, and 3
- Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles
- A Study Commentary on John, Volume 2: John 13–21
- A Study Commentary on John: Volume 1: John 1–12
- A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters: The Word, the Christ, the Son of God
- The Writings of John: A Survey of the Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
Incidentally, I just tested your first rule against my library
You gots a bigger libary than I does!!! [:D]
Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.
0 -
Based on Mark's initial rule, when I add "n.t. john" to my rule, I don't pick up NPF 1.7 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1.7: St. Augustin: Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliloquies).
Rule: (type:"bible commentary",monograph)(title:"gospel of john","thru the bible mcgee", subject:"N.T. John")-(subject:revelation,"1 John","2 John","3 John","John, 1st","John, 2nd","John, 3rd","epistles of john")
Not sure why.
0 -
David Bailey said:
Not sure why.
David,
There are two problems with your rule. The first is that many of the parentheses are in the wrong place. The second is that if you want commentaries that cover both John's Gospel and John's letters, then you need to use nested parentheses to exclude the subjects for John's letters only when the subject for John's gospel is not also present.
You have John's Gospel ANDNOT John's Letters.
I have John's Gospel ANDNOT (John's Letters ANDNOT John's Gospel).
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
That makes sense. It's always good to have another set of eyes to look at those rules. I've corrected my rule and they work much better, thanks to you and Todd.
[:)]
0 -
Doc B said:
Which one of these rules, over time, will give me the best info?
Wonder about rule: ?
Type:Commentary AND ((Subject:"N.T. John" ANDNOT Title:"1, 2, & 3") OR ((Subject:John,Title:John) ANDNOT Subject:(Epistles,"1 John","2 John","3 John",Revelation))) -Title:("Vol. 2","Vol. 8")
Johannine Grammar => http://www.logos.com/product/27099/johannine-grammar is Type:Grammar and Semeia is Type:Journal so an expanded collection rule for the Gospel of John could be:
Type:(Commentary,Grammar,Journal,Monograph) AND ((Subject:"N.T. John" ANDNOT Title:"1, 2, & 3") OR ((Subject:John,Title:John) ANDNOT Subject:(Epistles,"1 John","2 John","3 John",Revelation))) -Title:("Vol. 2","Vol. 8")
Note: Vol.2 and Vol. 8 of => http://www.logos.com/product/8549/the-whole-works-of-the-rev-john-lightfoot lack content about the Gospel of John.
Mark Barnes said:1, 2, & 3 John: Crossway Classic Commentaries
is a false positive that matches Subject:"N.T. John"
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Todd Phillips said:
Mark's rule excludes works that have "1 John" in the subject field, which makes the rule insufficient for works that cover both the Gospel and the Letter(s) of John.
I modified the rule to handle that situation:
type:commentary AND (subject:"N.T. John"....
Assuming Logos tagging is accurate then
type:commentary subject:N.T.John
will work. It gets all 15 in my library at least!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
Assuming Logos tagging is accurate then
type:commentary subject:N.T.John
will work. It gets all 15 in my library at least!
"1, 2, & 3 John: Crossway Classic Commentaries" matches Subject:N.T. John while lacking content about the Gospel of John
"Horae Homileticae" (vol 13 & 14), "Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: Matthew to John", and "The Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot" (vol 3, 4, & 5) do not have N.T. John in subject; yet these commentaries with John in the Title have content about the Gospel of John.
Commentaries: "The Life and Ministry of Jesus (Standard Reference Library New Testament, Vol. 1)" , "The Private Ministry of Christ" and "The Lectionary Commentary, Volume 3: The Gospels" also have Gospel of John content but subject and title do not have John.
Modified rule a bit to remove a false positive for Subject:N.T.John plus add nine more commentary resources:
Type:Commentary AND ((Subject:N.T.John ANDNOT Title:"1, 2, & 3") OR (Title:John ANDNOT Subject:(Epistles," 1"," 2"," 3",Revelation) ANDNOT Title:("Vol. 2","Vol. 8")) OR (Title:(Jesus,Lectionary,Private) AND Title:(Gospels,Ministry)))
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
Assuming Logos tagging is accurate then
type:commentary subject:N.T.John
This works very much better than it used to, which I guess shows how much the Logos catalogue metadata has improved. It only misses three titles our of 115 in my library (two Horae Homiliticae, and Darby's Synopsis). That's almost a high enough percentage to mean that we needn't worry about complex rules anymore...
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Modified rule a bit to remove a false positive for Subject:N.T.John plus add nine more commentary resources:
I'm not sure it's good practice to modify rules to add specific titles who aren't added automatically. These rule changes have a habit of coming back to bite you and in/excluding other titles inadvertently. I think we should use the "Plus these resources" and "Minus these resources" when we know our rule is correct but a few resources are wrongly in/excluded.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
First, Second, and Third John: Evangelical Exegetical Commentary
It is a bit off topic, but what do you think of EEC? Do you like it and how would you rank it in your library?
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
It is a bit off topic, but what do you think of EEC? Do you like it and how would you rank it in your library?
I haven't yet preached through a book that has an available EEC commentary, so I haven't used any of them exhaustively. For what it's worth, here's a screenshot of the first screen of commentaries on my prioritisation list. (There's two more screenfulls below, so it's ranked much higher than midway). That said, whenever I look at this list I have an urge to tweak it, because it's never quite right...
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
"1, 2, & 3 John: Crossway Classic Commentaries" matches Subject:N.T. John while lacking content about the Gospel of John
"Horae Homileticae" (vol 13 & 14), "Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: Matthew to John", and "The Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot" (vol 3, 4, & 5) do not have N.T. John in subject; yet these commentaries with John in the Title have content about the Gospel of John.
Commentaries: "The Life and Ministry of Jesus (Standard Reference Library New Testament, Vol. 1)" , "The Private Ministry of Christ" and "The Lectionary Commentary, Volume 3: The Gospels" also have Gospel of John content but subject and title do not have John.
Mark Barnes said:It only misses three titles our of 115 in my library (two Horae Homiliticae, and Darby's Synopsis).
Mark Barnes said:I'm not sure it's good practice to modify rules to add specific titles who aren't added automatically.
Guys,
consider adding an appropriate correction for Subject to http://wiki.logos.com/Metadata_correction_proposals (IMHO some of the titles should not be TYPE commentary!).
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
consider adding an appropriate correction for Subject to http://wiki.logos.com/Metadata_correction_proposals
Will do.
Dave Hooton said:(IMHO some of the titles should not be TYPE commentary!).
"Logos’ use of these types is primarily functional rather than descriptive. The Commentary type is used for many different kinds of resources that are indexed by Bible verse and that the user may want to appear in the Passage Guide" : http://wiki.logos.com/Metadata_correction_proposals_%E2%80%93_Addressed_by_Logos
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
The Commentary type is used for many different kinds of resources that are indexed by Bible verse and that the user may want to appear in the Passage Guide"
When some are "lessons" or "guides" and structured accordingly then I have contended with Logos that they should be TYPE "Bible Notes", which do appear in the Commentaries section of Passage Guide.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
Modified rule a bit to remove a false positive for Subject:N.T.John plus add nine more commentary resources:
I'm not sure it's good practice to modify rules to add specific titles who aren't added automatically. These rule changes have a habit of coming back to bite you and in/excluding other titles inadvertently. I think we should use the "Plus these resources" and "Minus these resources" when we know our rule is correct but a few resources are wrongly in/excluded.
Point noted so modified rule with Title exceptions to minimize inadvertent surprises:
Type:Commentary AND (Subject:N.T.John OR (Title:"Horae Homileticae" AND Title:("Vol. 13", "Vol. 14")) OR (Title:"Rev. John Lightfoot" AND Title:("Vol. 3", "Vol. 4", "Vol. 5")) OR Title:("Lectionary Commentary, Volume 3", "Life and Ministry of Jesus","Private Ministry of Christ")) -Title:"1, 2, & 3 John"
After metadata is updated, rule can be shortened. Concur with Dave that rule should be:
Type:Commentary Subject:N.T.John
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
For Canonical commentary collection rules, using subject(s) reduced number of false positives from title matches.
Updated wiki => http://wiki.logos.com/Canonical_Commentary_Collections and => http://wiki.logos.com/Example_Collections with shorter rule for 64 John:
Type:Commentary AND (Subject:N.T.John OR Title:(“Horae Homileticae Vol. 13”,”Horae Homileticae Vol. 14”,”Life and Ministry of Jesus”,”Private Ministry of Christ”)) -Title:”1, 2, & 3 John”
Rule for Old and New Testament commentaries now includes Lectionary Commentary and Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot:
Type:(“Bible Notes”,Commentary) AND (Author:(Gillis,Keil,Pechawer) OR Subject:(“Bible—Commentaries”,”Bible—Handbooks”,”Bible—Study and teaching”,”Lectionary Preaching”,”Prayer.”) OR (Subject:Bible AND Subject:(“King James”,”N.T. —Commentaries”,”O.T. —Commentaries”,”O.T.—Historical”,”O.T.—History”,Outline,Quotation,Reference,”Relation to”)) OR Title:(Olshausen,”Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot”)) -Title:(”Daily Study Bible Series”,”Letters from John”,”Preacher’s Commentary Series”,”Thru the Bible”,”Triple Tradition of the Exodus”)
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Dave Hooton said:Todd Phillips said:
Mark's rule excludes works that have "1 John" in the subject field, which makes the rule insufficient for works that cover both the Gospel and the Letter(s) of John.
I modified the rule to handle that situation:
type:commentary AND (subject:"N.T. John"....
Assuming Logos tagging is accurate then
type:commentary subject:N.T.John
will work. It gets all 15 in my library at least!
I like the simple rule above much better than what I currently have. Using the simpler rule, I modified it with this:
(type:commentary,monograph); (subject:"n.t. john")
This rule captures the same resources that my complex rule does, except one. I can easily add the missing resource to my collection. The simple rule, however, does not capture the 1 and 2 volume bible commentaries that may exist in one's library; and it the unmodified rule does not capture monographs that discuss some aspect of John's gospel.
(I also wonder why we can't open more than one instance of the Collection tool? I can use the Library to display another collection, but I'd prefer using the Collection tool so that I can make "what if" changes to the rules)
David
0 -
David Bailey said:
(type:commentary,monograph); (subject:"n.t. john")
Found rule:
(type:commentary,monograph); (subject:"n.t. john")
matches the same resources as:
type:(commentary,monograph) subject:N.T.John
David Bailey said:(I also wonder why we can't open more than one instance of the Collection tool? I can use the Library to display another collection, but I'd prefer using the Collection tool so that I can make "what if" changes to the rules)
If rule is short enough, can use library to show list of resource(s) matching rule. Personally dreaming of wider library filter box; found writing rule in Notepad, then copy and paste into Library box worked better than typing in smallish Library box.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Found rule:
(type:commentary,monograph); (subject:"n.t. john")
matches the same resources as:
type:(commentary,monograph) subject:N.T.John
Didn't know you could omit quotation marks around library filters when there are non alphanumeric characters in them (i.e., punctuation). That surprises me. I would have thought that latter construct would match anything with "N" in the subject. But then it would have to also have T and John somewhere in the metadata, so it might end up giving you the same results.
However I did an experiment in my Library.
subject:N T John gives 589 results (including many that don't have "N.T.John" in the subject)
but subject:N.T.John gives 142 results
So clearly the latter is different (and does what you expected it to).
Whaddya know! You learn something new every day.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
Didn't know you could omit quotation marks around library filters when there are non alphanumeric characters in them (i.e., punctuation).
Yup. Quotes are only needed for spaces in the name/value.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0
.
said:
