Prioritization

KJ Niblett

I love the logos ecosystem, however the one thing that lets it down is its system of prioritization.

It is messy, disorganized, and cumbersome when you have a large library.

My biggest wish is a more user friendly, more intuitive way of prioritizing resources.

A way to visually group by resource type;

Dictionaries

Commentaries

Bible Notes

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Francis

I agree that it is messy and I have also longed for a better way (although I realize also that the problem is a by-product of our abundance). I wonder, however, what it could look like.

A thought may be to have the "rank" column reflect prioritization (I am actually not sure what rank is supposed to reflect, I just know it does not match my prioritized resources) and a function to up or down the ranking to allow for quick prioritization (not advanced though). The idea would be that I could write type:Bible in the library box, sort by rank and then with a few clicks rearrange to match the order I want and do the same with other types of resources.

Bruce Dunning

My biggest wish is a more user friendly, more intuitive way of prioritizing resources.

Great suggestion.

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804333#Comment_804333

Great suggestion.

[Y]

Orpheus Heyward

very necessary

Matt Hamrick

I agree with your post, but one thing I took away from John Fallahee at LearnLogos.com was the ability to make empty personal books. So, I made several empty books and you can too. Just create a personal book and call it ==Bibles== and the text for the book, just write empty. Then don't make a cover and prioritize this book ahead of your bibles. I have the same empty books for Bible, Bible Dictionaries, Dictionaries, Hebrew Lexicons, Greek Lexicons, Commentaries, Devotions, and Journals. Each empty book will be a visual cue on where each set of resources begins. It has worked beautifully for what you are asking here until Faithlife makes a more intuitive system.

Erwin Stull, Sr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804347#Comment_804347

..... until Faithlife makes a more intuitive system.

I agree, this refinement will be most welcomed. [:)]

John at Learnlogos teaches the workaround method well, and the Faithlife Wiki describes a method of doing this. https://wiki.logos.com/Prioritizing#TimelineSeparator

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804323#Comment_804323

A thought may be to have the "rank" column reflect prioritization (I am actually not sure what rank is supposed to reflect,

The Rank is a calculation of the relevance of a particular resource that is common in natural language processing. IIRC Logos uses some version of tf-idf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tf%E2%80%93idf

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804472#Comment_804472

Prioritization is a more thorny issue than it looks. Prioritization is by datatype and resources are not limited to a single datatype. This means that the glossary in the back of a book may accidentally be prioritized above a dictionary because of the position you want for it among commentaries. (English head word, Bible reference). Add to this the desire to tie particular resources together without affecting the general priorities. (Advanced prioritization). I agree it needs improvement but recognize that it is a major project that maybe dependent upon other projects such as refining resource types and datatypes.

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804475#Comment_804475

Prioritization is a more thorny issue than it looks.

I agree, but the situation is similar as having a car under two feet of snow. There is not much choice if I want to drive it today.

I just wonder could it be possible to implement the priorizarion in small steps. The users get experience and there will be user feedback an optimal implementation will eventually show up.

At the same time I would like to see more fields in the library database (mytag1, mytag2 or something that we can name, with a possibility to hide rarely needed books from the library view for the time needed - I don't mean the current hide option in Logos which is a bit user-unfriendly)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804520#Comment_804520

Prioritization is a more thorny issue than it looks.

I agree, but the situation is similar as having a car under two feet of snow. There is not much choice if I want to drive it today.

Two feet of snow? My car isn't going anywhere until the roads are plowed. [;)] Okay, if you have to go think tractor and sled.

Seriously, I agree with you. I just want people to realize it is not happening in a day. Rather we may see preparatory work and a stepwise implementation of changes. I know that Eli and Bradley have given this much thought - I don't know if they've agreed on an approach or timeline ...

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804323#Comment_804323

A thought may be to have the "rank" column reflect prioritization (I am actually not sure what rank is supposed to reflect, I just know it does not match my prioritized resources)

"Rank" in the Library details view orders the displayed resources by how well they match the current query you've typed into the Library search box, where 1 = best match, 2 = 2nd best, 3 = 3rd best, and so on. Its purpose is to allow you to sort by Rank if you want resources relevant to your query at the top (as opposed to, say, sorting by Title).

The Rank column is only displayed if you have an active query (there's no concept of Rank if you're not searching the contents of the Library) and it has nothing to do with prioritisation.

GaoLu

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/804615#Comment_804615

Is my personal rating of a resource considered in that rank?

Cynthia in Florida

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/806882#Comment_806882

I would like to know the answer to this question too.

Is my personal rating of a resource considered in that rank?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/806882#Comment_806882

Is my personal rating of a resource considered in that rank?

No.