BUG: Mobile App Ignores Advanced Prioritization
I recently added UBS4 to the top of my prioritization list, but using advanced prioritization limited its position there only to Bruce Metzger's textual commentary on the NT. My top ranked Bible for all other resources remains the NRSV. It seems the iOS app doesn't respect advanced prioritization parameters, because now when I tap on a New Testament Bible reference in any resource it pulls up the Greek text.
The Android app seems to suffer from the same bug, and I have reported it in that forum as well.
Comments
-
-
We're aware of the issue and a bug report has been filed.
0 -
We're aware of the issue and a bug report has been filed.
Any update on this? It still seems to be an issue as far as I can tell.
0 -
Advanced prioritization is not currently synced but I'll update the case that the issue has been brought up again.
0 -
Thanks Kevin
0 -
Could advanced entries on the prioritization list simply be excluded from the sync? I would really like some resources (Metzger and others) to display the Greek text on the desktop Logos app. If they're interacting with textual criticism issues, seeing the English isn't much help.
At present I can't do this on the desktop, because to do so would mess with the mobile app. I don't care if the mobile app respects advanced prioritization (I generally don't do textual criticism work on mobile), but I'd rather have it ignore the resource than ignore the restrictions. Does that make sense?
0 -
Could advanced entries on the prioritization list simply be excluded from the sync? I would really like some resources (Metzger and others) to display the Greek text on the desktop Logos app. If they're interacting with textual criticism issues, seeing the English isn't much help.
At present I can't do this on the desktop, because to do so would mess with the mobile app. I don't care if the mobile app respects advanced prioritization (I generally don't do textual criticism work on mobile), but I'd rather have it ignore the resource than ignore the restrictions. Does that make sense?
It seems what you are asking is the opposite of this thread's intent, and it also sounds as if you are describing a Desktop issue or possibly confusing Prioritization with Advanced Prioritization...? I'm not quite sure, so would you be willing to create a new thread about this?
0 -
Oh darn. I'm sorry Mitchell, I just realized that you originated this thread. [:$]
For those still here, please state your complaints/requests in detail (preferably with examples) concerning Advanced Prioritization (or Prioritization in general). I can't promise anything except to create cases for the dev team.
0
