Keylinking?
How is keylink functionality accessed? I can't seem to find it e.g. to set my top 5 Greek lexica, or to set Greek to popup glosses as in L3.
Comments
-
Good question Richard. I would like to know that too!
Ian
0 -
Click on Library and then on Prioritize. Create a list of your favorite books under "prefer these resources".
0 -
How do you set the different "types" when you prioritize? This seems very cumbersome. Is there any difference in v4 between setting keylinks and defining equivalent resources? It seems they only have the prioritize setting available. In v3 I had EVERY resource in a parallel association so I could arrow through all equivalent resources with ease.
0 -
WynLaidig said:
How do you set the different "types" when you prioritize? This seems very cumbersome. Is there any difference in v4 between setting keylinks and defining equivalent resources?
I am likewise confused about the value of a single list for keylinking data types - you can right click to restrict to a data type or "from this resource", but I don't know that the latter is about "equivalent resources". It's wrong way round though - I like to see data types with a list of resources similar to v3.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Here's the thinking:
The Logos 3.x KeyLink setting dialog was incredibly powerful for power users, but our concern was that it scared new (and less sophisticated) users away. Nobody (I'm generalizing) had any idea what a data type was, and we made you choose from 65+ of them, then rank resources, etc.
Very few books are destinations for more than one data type. (Some lexicons incorrectly are, but we're cleaning them up.) So putting them all in one list makes it easier to explain -- "Just put your favorite resources into the list, in the order you prefer them" -- without giving up the ability to rank for any data type. (Putting the ESV over BDAG doesn't mess up your KeyLinks for Bible or Greek -- they'll only respond to their own types.)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
he Logos 3.x KeyLink setting dialog was incredibly powerful for power users, but our concern was that it scared new (and less sophisticated) users away. Nobody (I'm generalizing) had any idea what a data type was, and we made you choose from 65+ of them, then rank resources, etc.
3.X keylinking was intimidating and I enjoy messing around with settings. There can be lots of prioritized resources though, and this could make it kinda scary to try to prioritize.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Here's the thinking:
The Logos 3.x KeyLink setting dialog was incredibly powerful for
power users, but our concern was that it scared new (and less
sophisticated) users away. Nobody (I'm generalizing) had any idea what
a data type was, and we made you choose from 65+ of them, then rank
resources, etc.Very few books are destinations for more than one data type. (Some
lexicons incorrectly are, but we're cleaning them up.) So putting them
all in one list makes it easier to explain -- "Just put your favorite
resources into the list, in the order you prefer them" -- without
giving up the ability to rank for any data type. (Putting the ESV over
BDAG doesn't mess up your KeyLinks for Bible or Greek -- they'll only
respond to their own types.)I
appreciate making it easier for new users, but it seems to actually make it
harder for power users who want to order a lot of resources in a lot of
different data types. Perhaps having an advanced version of the Priority settings that isn't presented to basic user would be possible, or even a drop-down data-type filter that isn't shown by default. I have a love/hate relationship with the v3 keylink dialog...too small/not searchable, but it got the job done.P.S. it seems we have two active threads on this topic. Here's the other one for reference:
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
Good idea Todd, I totally agree, especially if you have a vast amount of resources. But as you say at least the job was done in v.3, but now it seems a bit too cumbersome.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
The Logos 3.x KeyLink setting dialog was incredibly powerful for power users, but our concern was that it scared new (and less sophisticated) users away. Nobody (I'm generalizing) had any idea what a data type was, and we made you choose from 65+ of them, then rank resources, etc.
There were too many data types but only 10 or so were of active interest (even to power users!). People could associate with Bible, English, Greek, Hebrew, and Strong's numbers so it was easy to explain that they are called data types! It was even easier to choose favourites from the resource lists.
Bob Pritchett said:Very few books are destinations for more than one data type. (Some lexicons incorrectly are, but we're cleaning them up.) So putting them all in one list makes it easier to explain -- "Just put your favorite resources into the list, in the order you prefer them" -- without giving up the ability to rank for any data type.
Except that "favourite resources" inevitably raises the very Q's that have occurred. Nobody is sure for what purpose until we start messing with the "data types" and realise we need favourites for Bible, English, Greek, Hebrew, and Strong's number! v3 showed us the defaults and we could easily arrange our favourites. In effect you are asking us to play favourites with thousands of our resources when the reality is around 50 resources amongst the main "data types". Then we come to "equivalent resources" that can be accessed with 1 Tim 2:13 which may be bibles or commentaries, and now I have to add favourite "commentaries" to the list. Then there are other categories we discover and the single list becomes more difficult to decipher and maintain.
But Enhanced Strong's is a valid destination for at least 4 data types and the DBL Lexicons are also valid for Strong's numbers. Which ones are you fixing? The spurious resources I'm aware of are those that claim Latin with a sprinkling of Latin words, and another that claims to host 5 languages!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Following Bob's suggestion about prioritizing a series I prioritised the NAC, which dutifully appeared at the top of the priority list. The unexpected result of this was that typing, for example Jn 1 18 into the 'command box' leaves me with the corresponding passage in the NAC rather than the ESV (which was previously at the top of the priority list).
To be honest, I am not sure what I wanted to do in prioritising the NAC, I am still swimming around the many new options and methods in version 4. I think what I expected was that when searching through a commentary, maybe in a passage guide, the NAC would be one of the first resources examined. I did not expect that bible references would no longer go to the bible but be intercepted by the commentary. This behaviour does not seem obvious, to me at least. When adding a resource to the top of the list itssems that you would need to know which data types it will intercept.
2017 15" MBP, iPad Pro
0 -
MartinFolley said:
Following Bob's suggestion about prioritizing a series I prioritised the NAC, which dutifully appeared at the top of the priority list. The unexpected result of this was that typing, for example Jn 1 18 into the 'command box' leaves me with the corresponding passage in the NAC rather than the ESV (which was previously at the top of the priority list).
Hi Martin, I found the same yesterday and was really surprised. However the fix is very simple. You just keep prioritized Bibles on the top of the list. The commentaries only then. It helps. I don't really like the way. I would appreciate suggestion given by Todd already that we would have 2 levels of setup. Simple (the current) and advanced (something like v3, only better).
Bohuslav
0 -
IMHO: adding books to the prioritised list in my library should send the book to the bottom of the list, not to the top. Logically, we select our most important items first and then one's of lesser importance. This saves, in some part, rearranging the priorities later.
0 -
DamianMcGrath said:
IMHO: adding books to the prioritised list in my library should send the book to the bottom of the list, not to the top. Logically, we select our most important items first and then one's of lesser importance. This saves, in some part, rearranging the priorities later.
Good point. Agreed.
Bohuslav
0 -
DamianMcGrath said:
IMHO: adding books to the prioritised list in my library should send the book to the bottom of the list, not to the top. Logically, we select our most important items first and then one's of lesser importance. This saves, in some part, rearranging the priorities later.
ditto
0 -
Say it again Sam.... this is one of the first things that is confusing me about this system. Adding a resource should go to the end of the list.
0 -
MartinFolley said:
Following Bob's suggestion about prioritizing a series I prioritised the NAC, which dutifully appeared at the top of the priority list. The unexpected result of this was that typing, for example Jn 1 18 into the 'command box' leaves me with the corresponding passage in the NAC rather than the ESV (which was previously at the top of the priority list).
To be honest, I am not sure what I wanted to do in prioritising the NAC, I am still swimming around the many new options and methods in version 4. I think what I expected was that when searching through a commentary, maybe in a passage guide, the NAC would be one of the first resources examined. I did not expect that bible references would no longer go to the bible but be intercepted by the commentary. This behaviour does not seem obvious, to me at least. When adding a resource to the top of the list itssems that you would need to know which data types it will intercept.
I still have along way to go on this but it seems to me that in this instance what one would want to do is be able to prioritize by resource type and data type so for instance when I am dealing with bible resource type and bible data type I want ESV to be my priority resource, but when I am dealing with resource type commentary and bible data type I want NAC to be my priority resource... a step further with bible data type and resource bible type I could say I want LXX my prioirty for Old Testament References and NA27 for NT and then add the further restriciton that this be the case only for resources with greek language type (if that even exists) . For Commentary Resource Type and BIble data type I might instead of wanting NAC for every reference I might want to choose a variety of commentaries for different books of the bible as my priority resource.... with these last two we are crossing over from keylinks to resource associations.. now whether this is possible I haven't really explored but is no longer a simple system that is suppossed to replace keylinks and make it easier for the new user... lust aother complicated system using different terminology and still tedious to setup with anything larger than a very small library.
0 -
Although we can use the advanced link to prioritize according to data
type, it is very impracticle to use when you want to modify things.
You have no way of looking at the prioritized list for a given data
type, other than looking at the properties associated with each
resource. SUGGESTION: It would be nice to have the OPTION of separating the priortized list according to data type, so we could then see at a glance how each data type is prioritized.0
