Can you help us improve search?

Page 2 of 4 (78 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >
This post has 77 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 36345
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 10 2022 7:30 PM

Beloved Amodeo:
Bible Browser is very helpful. If you could develop a tool for Basic Search that was similarly productive it may fill the bill. 

I've already done this for myself ... I think of the Bible Browser as part of the search function.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 2285
Mark | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 10 2022 7:36 PM

Mark Barnes (Faithlife):

MJ. Smith:
What I hear people asking for is something similar to some of the general editors for code. By which I mean that if one enters { it automatically adds }, or < generates > also. Or if I enter {Label M -- the drop down for M includes only valid labels beginning with M ... and the WHERE is automatically generated and attribute values are limited to ... You get the idea

Sounds familiar. I'm not saying that's a design we're necessarily considering, though. That's an old, old post.

Why not?  If you want to improve search, this is the way to do it.  It may be an old post, but it is relevent even today.  It has never been done to date.  Is that because it is too difficult?  If I want to do a search, I need to go to my browser bookmarks and look up Detailed search help in order to figure out the best search syntax.  Most of the time I do not do this because it is a pain in the neck.  But as far as I know, it is the only way to get accurate or specific results. 

So, if you want to improve search, then this design ought to be considered.

However, if you are not going to consider it, then the way to improve search is to have the search engine not need the syntax that it currently needs.

Posts 36345
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 10 2022 7:53 PM

Mark:

So, if you want to improve search, then this design ought to be considered.

However, if you are not going to consider it, then the way to improve search is to have the search engine not need the syntax that it currently needs.

Over the last decade I have fiddled with potential search feature interfaces and found it to be a surprising intractable for a search engine as powerful and diverse as that in Logos. I finally came to the conclusion that no redesign of the search interface will meet the needs of the user unless there is a very strong and comprehensive training element on how to form logically and semantically sound search requests. It may well be that no one agrees with me, but I am usually overly not underly optimistic in user interfaces.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 3574
Beloved Amodeo | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 10 2022 7:54 PM

MJ. Smith:

Beloved Amodeo:
Bible Browser is very helpful. If you could develop a tool for Basic Search that was similarly productive it may fill the bill. 

I've already done this for myself ... I think of the Bible Browser as part of the search function.

Do let the secret out...I'll drink the Kool Aid.

Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.

International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.

MacBook Pro macOS Big Sur 11.6 1TB SSD 

Posts 3574
Beloved Amodeo | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 10 2022 7:56 PM

MJ. Smith:

Mark:

So, if you want to improve search, then this design ought to be considered.

However, if you are not going to consider it, then the way to improve search is to have the search engine not need the syntax that it currently needs.

Over the last decade I have fiddled with potential search feature interfaces and found it to be a surprising intractable for a search engine as powerful and diverse as that in Logos. I finally came to the conclusion that no redesign of the search interface will meet the needs of the user unless there is a very strong and comprehensive training element on how to form logically and semantically sound search requests. It may well be that no one agrees with me, but I am usually overly not underly optimistic in user interfaces.

I agree with you!

Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.

International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.

MacBook Pro macOS Big Sur 11.6 1TB SSD 

Posts 57
LogosEmployee
Mark Barnes (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 2:37 AM

Mark:

Mark Barnes (Faithlife):

MJ. Smith:
What I hear people asking for is something similar to some of the general editors for code. By which I mean that if one enters { it automatically adds }, or < generates > also. Or if I enter {Label M -- the drop down for M includes only valid labels beginning with M ... and the WHERE is automatically generated and attribute values are limited to ... You get the idea

Sounds familiar. I'm not saying that's a design we're necessarily considering, though. That's an old, old post.

Why not?  If you want to improve search, this is the way to do it.  It may be an old post, but it is relevent even today.  It has never been done to date.  Is that because it is too difficult?  If I want to do a search, I need to go to my browser bookmarks and look up Detailed search help in order to figure out the best search syntax.  Most of the time I do not do this because it is a pain in the neck.  But as far as I know, it is the only way to get accurate or specific results. 

So, if you want to improve search, then this design ought to be considered.

However, if you are not going to consider it, then the way to improve search is to have the search engine not need the syntax that it currently needs.

There are lots of ways we could help with the problem of complex searching including better autocomplete and easier syntax. We're thinking through several possible options. But I didn't want to give anyone the impression we were committing to implement a suggestion I made seven years ago, long before I joined Faithlife! 

Posts 134
Bill | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 4:09 AM

Mark:

Why not?  If you want to improve search, this is the way to do it.  It may be an old post, but it is relevent even today.  It has never been done to date.  Is that because it is too difficult?  If I want to do a search, I need to go to my browser bookmarks and look up Detailed search help in order to figure out the best search syntax.  Most of the time I do not do this because it is a pain in the neck.  But as far as I know, it is the only way to get accurate or specific results. 

So, if you want to improve search, then this design ought to be considered.

However, if you are not going to consider it, then the way to improve search is to have the search engine not need the syntax that it currently needs.

Well stated Mark! I agree 110% Yes

Also "Basic" search is a misnomer. Searching a word or a simple phrase is straight forward enough, but once I get past that it is no longer "Basic". For me to do more complex searches it requires much time searching help, reading and rereading, and trying different suggestions and many times I still don't get it.Sad

The good news is, if I do stumble on one that works I save it in a Favorites folder so I don't have to go through that pain again, because you know I won't remember how to do it the next time. Big Smile

Mark Barnes- your old post idea looks like how I would perceive making complex searches better. However, I'm not a developer.

Is it doable programing wise?

What are the drawbacks of this concept?

What capabilities would we lose using it that we have now?

Posts 57
LogosEmployee
Mark Barnes (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 4:22 AM

Bill:

Mark Barnes- your old post idea looks like how I would perceive making complex searches better. However, I'm not a developer.

Do you want to make complex search syntax easier to enter? Or would you prefer not to need such complex syntax in the first place?

Posts 134
Bill | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 5:32 AM

Thanks for asking Mark.

Option One- I think if we must use complex syntax it should be easier to enter. For me, and I assume for many, the syntax is not understandable, clear or easy to remember, but it is powerful. Can option number two provide that same power?

Option Two- Obviously I would prefer not to have to use complex syntax, However, my concern with option two, if I understand it correctly, is that we may lose the power and flexibility to build our own searches, and be limited to using pre designed canned searches that may not meet our need. Even if we were left with the option of building searches with complex syntax in this option, it would not resolve the issues in option one I pointed out. 

Don't know if this makes sense, or is even feasible, but if the program could determine the type of search we are attempting by the words or terms we type, and either enter the proper syntax, or offer a drop down list of workable options, that would help the user by not having to remember which syntax or terms to use or where to place it. Through use, I think it  would also become a good training tool for the user.

Conclusion; Keep the power of complex searches, but make the syntax easier to understand, use, and enter, or make the syntax it self less complicated.Big Smile 

Thank you, I hope this is somewhat helpful.

Posts 1667
PL | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 5:51 AM

Mark Barnes (Faithlife):
Do you want to make complex search syntax easier to enter? Or would you prefer not to need such complex syntax in the first place?

I personally would strongly prefer not to need the complex search syntax in the first place. But I like Bill's compromise suggestion, to offer the option for those who want to continue using the complex syntax.

Option A: When typing in a search query, autocomplete will show options in the form of well-formed search syntax queries

Option B: When typing in a search query, autocomplete will show options of frequently requested searches successfully executed by other users similar to what you're typing (similar to Google's autocomplete)

I also agree with Bill that "Basic Search" has been a misnomer that should have been changed to something like "General Search" long time ago. I'm surprised it hasn't been done yet.

Posts 299
Fabian | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 6:52 AM

Philana R. Crouch:

Fabian:

Yes. At least as an option. 

Today. The autocomplete doesn't find it. Or I don't know how to do it. Bibles and other texts have often  their unique words. Nebukadnezzar, Nebucadnezar etc. I know in English they are mostly standardized, but not in German, Italian etc. So the autocomplete should make suggestion which is actually in the resource which is open. And it should find it which is not the case today. 

Hi Fabian,

I'm not able to reproduce this. Can you let me know what Bible's beyond the ESV where you are seeing this?

Hello Philana 

Maybe autocomplete is not the right term. Suggestions what is IN the Actual text would fit it better. 

I mocked it here https://community.logos.com/forums/p/199019/1154916.aspx#1154916 to get more attention.

I also discuss it here https://community.logos.com/forums/t/206074.aspx The website translator of Apple is not bad. Or you can use deepl.com for better results. 

Fabian

Posts 19600
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 7:29 AM

Mark Barnes (Faithlife):
Do you want to make complex search syntax easier to enter?

List of values for complex search autocompletion would be appreciated: e.g. labels, grammatical constructions, headwords, milestones, ...

For example, if my search has 

{Section <GrammaticalConstructions V

having autocomplete pop-up of valid GrammaticalConstructions beginning with V would be appreciated. Awesome would be including aliases: e.g. "Verbless Clause" is also called "Nominal Clause" and "Noun Clause" (clicking "Noun Clause" in pop-up could cause "Verbless Clause" to appear in my search).

Backing up a bit is if my search has

{Section

then autocomplete pop-up could show popular {Section ... search terms (if entire list of valid {Section options is too big for sub-second assistance).

Autocomplete assistance taking more than a second to appear is disruptive for human thinking (short term memory limitation). Many times have desired option to turn off search assistant "help" that took too long to appear.

Also have experienced a completed search having autocomplete suggestions popping up again & again when changing tab focus (annoying at times).

My quirk is preferring new tabs to be in one floating window (often for a screen shot illustration in a forum discussion). New Syntax Search defaults to needing a new floating window.

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 3106
LogosEmployee
Andrew Batishko | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 8:14 AM

Fabian:

Maybe autocomplete is not the right term. Suggestions what is IN the Actual text would fit it better. 

I mocked it here https://community.logos.com/forums/p/199019/1154916.aspx#1154916 to get more attention.

I also discuss it here https://community.logos.com/forums/t/206074.aspx The website translator of Apple is not bad. Or you can use deepl.com for better results. 

The current implementation does suggest only those text terms that are actually in the resource. Or at least it's supposed to. If it doesn't, that's a bug.

Neither Philana nor I can recreate your experience when the application is set to German and searching ESV. I'm seeing it suggest "barren", "barrier", and "barracks". Philana is hoping to get some additional information that will help us recreate the bug.

Andrew Batishko | Faithlife software developer

Posts 464
John Connell | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 9:08 AM

Beloved, You might find the secret Kool Aid here: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/197659.aspx

MJ shows how the Bible Browser sets up a search by using "Send To" function. Pretty cool Kool Aid!

-john

And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers (Mal 4:6a)

Posts 299
Fabian | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 9:57 AM

Andrew Batishko:

The current implementation does suggest only those text terms that are actually in the resource. Or at least it's supposed to. If it doesn't, that's a bug.

Neither Philana nor I can recreate your experience when the application is set to German and searching ESV. I'm seeing it suggest "barren", "barrier", and "barracks". Philana is hoping to get some additional information that will help us recreate the bug.

Have you read the posts seriously?

First: I have NO suggestions in PBBs at all. That should be easy to track down.

Second: In the ESV I have different suggestions depending if Logos or Verbum are in German or English.

To the bugs above I had as suggestion "barred" (Logos on English) as I clicked on it I got "bars".

Bug: No suggestions in PBB. It is completely absent.

Bug: Logos in German I found two words. Both are in the ESV. Why the others are missed the suggestions. They should be 5.

Bug: Logos in English I found 5 words. One I get in German is missed (it seems this is not from the ESV, even if it is popping up). And one suggestion gives wrong results (bars instead of barren). 

Bug: NB.Mick had "Barren" "Barriere" in the ESV search. Both are German words. https://community.logos.com/forums/AddPost.aspx?ReplyToPostID=1199334&Quote=False. You can't say this is from the resource. He suggested, Logos take the words from a German word list, not from the actual resource. Why he get total different suggestions? BTW my Mac is not primarily on German UI. German is only the second language if there is no translation to the primarily one. But either way: Logos don't take the words/numbers from the actual resource. Neither on the ESV nor on PBB if is on German. And also not from PBB if it is on English as well.

Posts 3574
Beloved Amodeo | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 11:55 AM

John Connell:

Beloved, You might find the secret Kool Aid here: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/197659.aspx

MJ shows how the Bible Browser sets up a search by using "Send To" function. Pretty cool Kool Aid!

-john

Thank you, John. I missed this tour de force. MJ reveals the magic of Bible Browser. It's better than Kool Aid and delivers on its promises. I really have to comb through this and glean all of its riches.

Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.

International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.

MacBook Pro macOS Big Sur 11.6 1TB SSD 

Posts 3106
LogosEmployee
Andrew Batishko | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 12:57 PM

Fabian:
Have you read the posts seriously?

Absolutely. They have not provided us with enough information to allow us to recreate your problems.

Fabian:
First: I have NO suggestions in PBBs at all.

Thank you. I can recreate this problem. I've written up a case to fix this issue.

Fabian:
Second: In the ESV I have different suggestions depending if Logos or Verbum are in German or English.

I believe I understand now what you are seeing. This is due to the behavior of the Match All Word Forms option. If you open a Search panel and open the panel menu, you will see that you have selected the option to Match All Word Forms. Uncheck that option. Then you should see the same suggestions in English and German.

I believe the difference when that is turned on is due to the fact that the process that finds word forms is based on the language of the UI, and using the German process is not going to work as well on English text. This does seem like it could do a better job in certain situations (particularly when searching a single book). I have written up a case to make an improvement here.

Fabian:
To the bugs above I had as suggestion "barred" (Logos on English) as I clicked on it I got "bars".

This is working as intended. If you open a Search panel and open the panel menu, you will see that you have selected the option to Match All Word Forms. If you turn that option off, then the other hits won't be returned.

Fabian:
Bug: NB.Mick had "Barren" "Barriere" in the ESV search. Both are German words. https://community.logos.com/forums/AddPost.aspx?ReplyToPostID=1199334&Quote=False. You can't say this is from the resource.

Those are not suggestions for the searching the surface text. Note the icon to the left of the suggestion. Those are word senses, and are valid suggestions that are being correctly localized in the UI language.

I believe the two cases I created plus the extra explanations cover all the issues you are seeing.

And my apologies for hijacking Mark's thread...

Andrew Batishko | Faithlife software developer

Posts 6010
Simon’s Brother | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 1:51 PM

Mark Barnes (Faithlife):

MJ. Smith:
I cooperated but I am very curious as to why you have focused on the autocompleter?

Only that we're less clear about what users want from that feature. It doesn't mean we think it's the most important problem to solve.

I want the ability to turn it off ( and of course on for those that use it) in general settings for basic and bible search. And then when I am doing a search, I want the ability to turn it for those specific instances it might be useful when searching doing a search of non-English resources to complete the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic etc word.

Posts 299
Fabian | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 2:24 PM

Andrew Batishko:

I believe I understand now what you are seeing. This is due to the behavior of the Match All Word Forms option. If you open a Search panel and open the panel menu, you will see that you have selected the option to Match All Word Forms. Uncheck that option. Then you should see the same suggestions in English and German.

Thanks, but I've talked the whole time about the Inline search, and this is not option there. In the inline search (see the images I've posted), there should only come up whats in the actual resource is. Not from another language etc. A French Bible, the words of this Bible. A German Commentary, the words of that commentary etc. With suggestions on the actual resource. At least from the top down. As second if there are fields in the resource, you can put fields. Like <Manuscript> and then if I click on it the manuscript are listed or only the next search is in the manuscript. So I can filter for this "Milestones". For example I type "p" if the manuscript is active, all "P46,.... etc." come up in the suggestions. It should be clear only the <Fields> which is in the actual resource should be listed. 

For example: I search for "barr"

Results. 

barren

barrenness

etc. 

<Footnotes> because there are footnotes, I click on it. And type "T" 

Results all with beginning "T" in the footnotes. 

Except I want to to further out of the actual resource. Either a button or by search command, which Logos recognize this is now for the whole bunch. 

Posts 6120
SineNomine | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 11 2022 2:27 PM

I used the form and endorse MJ's three initial suggestions.

“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara

Page 2 of 4 (78 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next > | RSS