Custom order of canonical books?

No, Faithlife has yet to understand that for many of us there is no "standard" sequence but rather several "standard sequences".

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/688842#Comment_688842

No, Faithlife has yet to understand that for many of us there is no "standard" sequence but rather several "standard sequences".

Majority rules, I suppose...

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/688856#Comment_688856

Well, no, that is my basic complaint. A subset of English speaking Protestants rule as I see it ... okay that is the majority in America. But be sure to post a suggestion in the Suggestion forum ... slow nagging works. [:#]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/688859#Comment_688859

Well, no, that is my basic complaint. A subset of English speaking Protestants rule as I see it ... okay that is the majority in America. But be sure to post a suggestion in the Suggestion forum ... slow nagging works.

I feel your pain.

Rayner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/688861#Comment_688861

Well, no, that is my basic complaint. A subset of English speaking Protestants rule as I see it ... okay that is the majority in America. But be sure to post a suggestion in the Suggestion forum ... slow nagging works.

I feel your pain.

Fully agree with all of this. Also require more support for the apocrypha. Protestants typically have a smaller canon and this impacts the rest of the software.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/688871#Comment_688871

For now, canonical ordering comes from the "generic" Bible data type, which is modeled on the NRSV (plus a few necessary additions).

However, better handling of the diversity of canons is on my list of things to draw up designs for in Q1 2015. All that does is get the ball rolling, of course, and I suspect it will entail a many small (and some large) changes throughout the software.

Slow nagging does work, cf Luke 18. [:)]

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689300#Comment_689300

[H]

Slow nagging does work, cf Luke 18.

Please work on something more appealing and productive, like making personal books available on Mobil devices. I'm sure the majority will benefit more from that, than worrying about the canonical order of the books of the Bible. We've done extremely well without that feature, so dont feel bad if you have to "slow nag it" 2 more decades ;-)

DAL

Rick Brannan (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689300#Comment_689300

For now, canonical ordering comes from the "generic" Bible data type, which is modeled on the NRSV (plus a few necessary additions).

Though note that if a given Bible orders its books differently (so, has a specific Bible data type, not the generic one) that order is generally supported for that Bible. See, for example, the transcription of Codex Bezae (free download: https://www.logos.com/product/29619/codex-bezae-cantabrigiensis). Search for a common word like μαθηται (cf. Mt 5.1); the order of hits is in Bezae's order: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689368#Comment_689368

Uh oh. Rick's note really puts a dent in the fender.

But I will say, the issue is more than a segment of protestants vs the rest of Christianity.

In my software, I have selectable ordering. Within the selections, I include some of the proposed OT orderings (to understand 'writings' vs 'law and the prophets'), and also estimated date written. I do the same on estimated date written in the NT and especially the apocrypha/pseudepigrapha/apostolic-fathers.

Plus as the above hints at, I have customizable canons which allow subsets of books (eg splitting out the 2nd Corinthians segments).

So, the functionality is quite useful, beyond simply 'denomination'.

And to DAL, true ... uploaded PBs would be great.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689368#Comment_689368

Though note that if a given Bible orders its books differently

Right. I should have said "canonical ordering (in tools, not resources)".

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689367#Comment_689367

Please work on something more appealing and productive, like making personal books available on Mobil devices.

Personal books on mobile devices has been designed for a while. [:)]

Checking into it now ...

George Somsel

Since it is a simple matter to move from one book to another in Logos, I'm wondering why this should be an issue.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689367#Comment_689367

Please work on something more appealing and productive, like making personal books available on Mobil devices. I'm sure the majority will benefit more from that, than worrying about the canonical order of the books of the Bible. We've done extremely well without that feature, so dont feel bad if you have to "slow nag it" 2 more decades ;-)

DAL

Logos needs to balance several factors:

growing and maintaining the features that appeal to their current majority of users
growing the features necessary to move marginal users into the good customer range
growing the features necessary to tip the scale for non-Logos users to become users
growing the features necessary to gain/retain a positive reputation.

As users. we have a vested interest in the welfare of Logos and therefore need to take the same elements into account when we decide to promote particular changes. This means that sometimes we promote features we never expect to use because we don't write sermons, don't read Coptic, don't use A/V. With Logos clearly trying to make a push into Judaica in Noet, Catholics in Verbum and Orthodox in Logos, the balance has shifted towards single canon order being an embarrassment whereas a decade ago it was reasonable. At least they had the foresight to chose the ecumenical NRSV order which I suspect will become a very common standard.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689421#Comment_689421

Mobile PB's have been DESIGNED?! Great!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689423#Comment_689423

(Veering off topic.) It would be simple if you didn't ever want to search them. The mobile applications don't index your library on your phone or tablet, but on a server that has one universal index of all resources that's the same for all users. So there is some code to be written server-side to make sure uploading and syncing a PBB doesn't fire off the indexer for everyone else. Solvable, but non-trivial.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689427#Comment_689427

Just buy out Google - I understand they have some pretty cool indexing algorithms. [;)]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689427#Comment_689427

Well, Eli, you bring up an interesting point (and not disagreeing with you). Logos mass indexes some else's PB, which has exactly what I'm looking for! I wonder what that'd be worth. Years (?) back, Bob discussed a 'store' of PBs. Very interesting concept.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689402#Comment_689402

Though note that if a given Bible orders its books differently

Right. I should have said "canonical ordering (in tools, not resources)".

Does this mean custom orders will only be reflected in searches and not in reading Bibles?
Personally, I would like my preferred order to be system wide, so if I loaded up the ESV or LEB and clicked on the narrator, that it would read the Bible (and scroll through the pages) according to that order. On a programming level, I think something similar to this in your search feature would work very well, with predefined lists which are able to be edited/adjusted to what the user would prefer. Smart typing would be cool, where you could type: Tanakh, Apocrypha, Gospels & Acts, General epistles, Paul's epistles, Hebrews, Revelation.

Tanakh standing for the Jewish order of the Hebrew bible.

But it's great news this is being developed!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689605#Comment_689605

Does this mean custom orders will only be reflected in searches and not in reading Bibles?

I would expect there to be legal contractual difficulties in changing the order of a resource. However, one can build reading plans that reflect your preferred order. I also have a number of collections for limiting searches that are based on the sequence of a particular Bible -- I would hate to have to remember my current sequence preference as well when I went to do a search. But it would be nice to get all our passage lists in all the guides and tools, the spark charts, etc. to reflect our preferred sequence.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689607#Comment_689607

I would expect there to be legal contractual difficulties in changing the order of a resource.

You mean like how the Hollywood studios hated Clearplay for allowing users to automatically mute bad language and skip over pornographic senses, etc. so that parents could play clean versions of films for their children?

Seriously though, if we've bought a bible, why should the publishers dictate which order we read it in? *boggles my mind*

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689611#Comment_689611

As I said we can read it in any order; Faithlife simply has to faithfully represent the book which is why they need publisher permission to correct typos that occur in the printed text for which Faithlife bought the rights. Think of it ... we might have Luther rearranging the NT again[:P]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/689616#Comment_689616

Hmmm. Well we definitely wouldn't want to remove books like Luther wanted with James or like what Marcion did....