Announcement: New E-commerce Product Search Engine Implementation

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301753#Comment_1301753

Well, ok. e-Commerce away with solutions.

- No improvement on using the filters (sorts, etc)

- Can't select a set, with order by title

- Still doesn't know common Logos resource abbreviations (eg commentaries) so miss a lot of products

- Drop down in search creation shows resource; search can't find it

- Have to reset filters with each search

- Doesn't allow easy multi-element filter

And on .... and on .... and on. Why is selling product such a challenge for Faithlife?

Don Awalt

This might explain a lot. I clicked on link I save for exploring each month - I view Unowned/Available to Me/Pre-Pub/In Production/English/Research Edition/Sorted by Progress.

I only see 2 books with ship dates, a 6/20 and a 7/15, the rest seem to all be "In Production" (meaning no date). Wait - there are a bunch of "In Production", then a 6/17. A bunch more "In Production", then a 7/10.

I gave up even looking at Prepubs this weekend. This is a mess - how can we easily see what's coming out soon by date, with the filters we care about?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301753#Comment_1301753

Thank you for the feedback. Our new search solution makes improving some of this easier. For example, we'll be working to improve search results for queries with abbreviations. If you have a specific abbreviation you're not seeing good results for, please let us know; and we'll appreciate additional feedback as you have it.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301756#Comment_1301756

The system is mixed - is the Baptist package renamed Southern Baptist Convention randomly?

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301753#Comment_1301753

- Drop down in search creation shows resource; search can't find it

If I'm understanding this correctly, this is an area for future improvement mentioned in the OP:

improved as-you-type suggestions

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301757#Comment_1301757

specific abbreviation you're not seeing

Michael, please install SSST. This is Short Studies in Systematic Theology.

Bring up Thomas Schreiner: 'Justification: an Introduction' (Short Studies in Systematic Theology is bracketed behind the title.)

What vexes me is Logos should have had this fixed before rollout. This 'send and listen' method of fixing something is vastly inferior. To me, this is indifference in action.

I note this is your first post, Mike. Thank you for talking to us. Senior Logos employees need to do better, which empowers the team to provide higher quality results to users.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301760#Comment_1301760

If I'm understanding this correctly, this is an area for future improvement mentioned in the OP:

improved as-you-type suggestions

I guess I'm not understanding. If it can find the resource as you type, then why not present it in search results?

Oh, then the 4 pages/scrolls of featured results ... none having anything to do with the search.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301761#Comment_1301761

specific abbreviation you're not seeing

Michael, please install SSST. This is Short Studies in Systematic Theology.

Bring up Thomas Schreiner: 'Justification: an Introduction' (Short Studies in Systematic Theology is bracketed behind the title.)

What vexes me is Logos should have had this fixed before rollout. This 'send and listen' method of fixing something is vastly inferior. To me, this is indifference in action.

I note this is your first post, Mike. Thank you for talking to us. Senior Logos employees need to do better, which empowers the team to provide higher quality results to users.

SSST and Short Studies in Systematic Theology are now synonyms and a query like ssst justification will bring up the mentioned title in results. We'll be working to further improve cases where acronyms vs full phrase (or opposite) is used in titles and/or descriptions to improve results.

Thanks!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301763#Comment_1301763

SSST and Short Studies in Systematic Theology are now synonyms and a query like ssst justification will bring up the mentioned title in results. We'll be working to further improve cases where acronyms vs full phrase (or opposite) is used in titles and/or descriptions to improve results.

Thanks!

Thank you, Mike!

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301764#Comment_1301764

When I click on the ecomerce link, I learn that there are 21,765 books I own, 2095 books partially owned, 313 books that I do not own, but when I click the ALL button, it says there are 112,831 books. That number changes sometimes to 111,000 or 102,000 books. But if I only do not own 313 of the books, something is not right.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301773#Comment_1301773

if I only do not own 313 of the books, something is not right.

Yeah. It's 327 or me, but definitely not right.

Despite the official announcement, I didn't see the multitude of users crying out for a change of the shop search - let alone in the direction it has taken. Some few regulars did voice their opinion once in a while regarding small refinements (for which workarounds usually were present). Much more often I seem to remember complaints going in the direction of "the algorithm is okay, fix the wrong/missing metadata to let it work!" Author names (several per individual), languages (often simply missing) and religious group affiliation among other things come to mind.

Right now I'm thinking "if it's not broken, don't fix it" - this would avoid introducing new bugs.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301775#Comment_1301775

I didn't see the multitude of users crying out for a change of the shop search

I rarely complained here but when I was forced to call a sales rep, they heard my frustration.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301773#Comment_1301773

When I click on the ecomerce link, I learn that there are 21,765 books I own, 2095 books partially owned, 313 books that I do not own, but when I click the ALL button, it says there are 112,831 books. That number changes sometimes to 111,000 or 102,000 books. But if I only do not own 313 of the books, something is not right.

The announcement above said this could happen:

We are aware of concerns that facet counts do not match expectations when filters or sorts are applied and that counts sometimes change to different numbers when refreshing the same search query. The counts you are seeing are provided by the third-party solution and unfortunately it is not possible to make them consistent between searches. This new solution prioritizes performance of search queries more than retrieving accurate or consistent total result counts in order to guarantee quick response times for your searches. We are considering alternate solutions such as hiding the facet counts altogether for search scenarios where this problem is most evident.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301775#Comment_1301775

Despite the official announcement, I didn't see the multitude of users crying out for a change of the shop search - let alone in the direction it has taken. Some few regulars did voice their opinion once in a while regarding small refinements (for which workarounds usually were present). Much more often I seem to remember complaints going in the direction of "the algorithm is okay, fix the wrong/missing metadata to let it work!" Author names (several per individual), languages (often simply missing) and religious group affiliation among other things come to mind.

Right now I'm thinking "if it's not broken, don't fix it" - this would avoid introducing new bugs.

Yup.

Mark

We are aware of concerns that facet counts do not match expectations when filters or sorts are applied and that counts sometimes change to different numbers when refreshing the same search query. The counts you are seeing are provided by the third-party solution

I did not do a search querry beyond the buttons provided. I wanted to check how many books are sold on the ecomerce site. I also wanted to check how many I owned and did not own. These buttons are provided. I did not do a search for specific books. If the third party cannot get such basic things right...

The bottom line: If I want a book you sell but cannot find it, I cannot buy.

Hi Nate, here's a bug:

Search for "A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War: How J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis Rediscovered Faith, Friendship, and Heroism in the Cataclysm of 1914-18" (with or without the quotation marks) and it doesn't find that book, even though it's in the dropdown list and matches even a portion of the title typed in.

And Logos does indeed have the book; I can find it through other searches.

Result? Nada!

Jordan Litchfield

Nate, I was perfectly happy with the previous search arrangements, and am really disappointed by this change. I used "Unowned" a lot and will really miss this. I don't want to have to sort through the abundance of books I already own every time I am looking for something.

It seems lately like every time Logos is making a change to something, its not for the better. If it wasn't for the fact that I have significantly invested in the library, I would be looking elsewhere. And I certainly won't be recommending Logos any longer.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301806#Comment_1301806

I used "Unowned" a lot and will really miss this. I don't want to have to sort through the abundance of books I already own every time I am looking for something.

Huh? This is the first facet on the browse books option.

Tes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301811#Comment_1301811

Is there a training video for this ?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301812#Comment_1301812

Is there a training video for this ?

No. The user interface hasn't changed. Just use it the way you always have.

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301811#Comment_1301811

I used "Unowned" a lot and will really miss this. I don't want to have to sort through the abundance of books I already own every time I am looking for something.

Huh? This is the first facet on the browse books option.

Yes, and as it says in the OP this will no longer work properly.

Bernhard

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301817#Comment_1301817

I used "Unowned" a lot and will really miss this. I don't want to have to sort through the abundance of books I already own every time I am looking for something.

Huh? This is the first facet on the browse books option.

Yes, and as it says in the OP this will no longer work properly.

I don't think it does. Where do you see that? (Besides the number counts being off, it seems otherwise to work as before)

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301819#Comment_1301819

I used "Unowned" a lot and will really miss this. I don't want to have to sort through the abundance of books I already own every time I am looking for something.

Huh? This is the first facet on the browse books option.

Yes, and as it says in the OP this will no longer work properly.

I don't think it does. Where do you see that? (Besides the number counts being off, it seems otherwise to work as before)

Nate Merritt: "The counts you are seeing are provided by the third-party solution and unfortunately it is not possible to make them consistent between searches. This new solution prioritizes performance of search queries more than retrieving accurate or consistent total result counts in order to guarantee quick response times for your searches. We are considering alternate solutions such as hiding the facet counts altogether for search scenarios where this problem is most evident."

Also, see Mark and Rosie's first posts in this thread.

GaoLu

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301820#Comment_1301820

Every time I click on ownership categories I get a different number. I expect this, and find it curious. I suppose its a done deal, and maybe an improvement--eventually. Better search results would be nice.

Must be my conservative nature that says, "If it ain't fixed, don't break it."

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301775#Comment_1301775

Despite the official announcement, I didn't see the multitude of users crying out for a change of the shop search - let alone in the direction it has taken. Some few regulars did voice their opinion once in a while regarding small refinements (for which workarounds usually were present). Much more often I seem to remember complaints going in the direction of "the algorithm is okay, fix the wrong/missing metadata to let it work!" Author names (several per individual), languages (often simply missing) and religious group affiliation among other things come to mind.

Right now I'm thinking "if it's not broken, don't fix it" - this would avoid introducing new bugs.

I agree - I think this is a really unhelpful change

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301819#Comment_1301819

I don't think it does. Where do you see that? (Besides the number counts being off, it seems otherwise to work as before)

They took away how much of a collection you owned (sort). Result is every collection, that you have a random book, gets more prominance (user can't impact).

Tes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301814#Comment_1301814

No. The user interface hasn't changed. Just use it the way you always have
.

OK. Rosie thank you!

Don Awalt

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301844#Comment_1301844

I am sorry, this is one of the most terrible decisions Logos has ever made! How can you mess up search so badly? I will NEVER use this.

Imagine -

"The counts you are seeing are provided by the third-party solution and unfortunately it is not possible to make them consistent between searches. This new solution prioritizes performance of search queries more than retrieving accurate or consistent total result counts

Translated, "We wanted to make search fast enough so we made it inaccurate". Really? What about searches to see if there are volumes of a collection or series I don't have? Maybe I see them, maybe I don't. What if I want to look for books I don't own by a favorite author? Maybe I find them, maybe I don't. And in order to get search results an extra 1 second faster, I give up accuracy and completeness? Who ever thought of this???

People are asking where the training session is? FOR SEARCH?

Filters may or may not work?

I still don't know if the lack of shipment dates, vs. "In Production" for most resources now, is related.

Who else has a Search mechanism like this?

This is a TOTAL disaster. I buy a lot of books through searching, and I can assure you that I will no longer do this, if this is the search mechanism that remains. PLEASE return the old search, ASAP. Thank you.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301795#Comment_1301795

Hi Nate, here's a bug:

Search for "A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War: How J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis Rediscovered Faith, Friendship, and Heroism in the Cataclysm of 1914-18" (with or without the quotation marks) and it doesn't find that book, even though it's in the dropdown list and matches even a portion of the title typed in.

Thanks for reporting this. I've just tried a few times and I'm unable to reproduce, currently. So, it seems that is working as expected now. We'll continue to investigate.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301756#Comment_1301756

This might explain a lot. I clicked on link I save for exploring each month - I view Unowned/Available to Me/Pre-Pub/In Production/English/Research Edition/Sorted by Progress.

I only see 2 books with ship dates, a 6/20 and a 7/15, the rest seem to all be "In Production" (meaning no date). Wait - there are a bunch of "In Production", then a 6/17. A bunch more "In Production", then a 7/10.

I gave up even looking at Prepubs this weekend. This is a mess - how can we easily see what's coming out soon by date, with the filters we care about?

Don, thanks for the feedback. Our implementation goal was for search filtering and sorting to return the same products as before if no search query is provided. Could you please share a link to your search so we can investigate? Is your concern that sorting by "Progress" has different behavior than before? I tried to recreate your search based upon the filters you provided and see hundreds of results.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301853#Comment_1301853

The count of results is limited to improve performance, but that count is still typically quite large as well as accurate. Many search users do not typically look at more than the first two pages of search results before further updating and refining their search. Refining query terms and/or using additional facets will help raise results you're looking for to the top of your results.

I am sorry, this is one of the most terrible decisions Logos has ever made! How can you mess up search so badly? I will NEVER use this.

Imagine -

"The counts you are seeing are provided by the third-party solution and unfortunately it is not possible to make them consistent between searches. This new solution prioritizes performance of search queries more than retrieving accurate or consistent total result counts

Translated, "We wanted to make search fast enough so we made it inaccurate". Really? What about searches to see if there are volumes of a collection or series I don't have? Maybe I see them, maybe I don't. What if I want to look for books I don't own by a favorite author? Maybe I find them, maybe I don't. And in order to get search results an extra 1 second faster, I give up accuracy and completeness? Who ever thought of this???

People are asking where the training session is? FOR SEARCH?

Filters may or may not work?

I still don't know if the lack of shipment dates, vs. "In Production" for most resources now, is related.

Who else has a Search mechanism like this?

This is a TOTAL disaster. I buy a lot of books through searching, and I can assure you that I will no longer do this, if this is the search mechanism that remains. PLEASE return the old search, ASAP. Thank you.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301859#Comment_1301859

Many search users do not typically look at more than the first two pages of search results before further updating and refining their search.

I personally do. Regularly. Several 60-items pages of unowned resources.

One point is that the facets typically don't help in reducing my search further - they either don't have the criteria I'm looking for or might make me miss relevant items due to missing/wrong metadata. But I now remember what search refinemenent users actually did ask for, even quite often: negative facets, allowing me to exclude stuff I'm not interested in (e.g. languages I don't read, certain faith traditions etc) or that I already browsed to my personal completeness.

Don Awalt

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301857#Comment_1301857

Could you please share a link to your search so we can investigate? Is your concern that sorting by "Progress" has different behavior than before?

Nate, this is one of my 2 links I use to search - I have a similar one on Verbum.com:

https://www.logos.com/search?limit=60&page=1&ownership=unowned&filters=status-prepub_Status%2Blanguage-english_Language%2Bstatus-prepub-undercontract_Pre-Pub%2Bformat-research_Format%2Bformat-reader_Format&sortBy=Progress&geographicAvailability=availableToMe

It's different - I think some of the facets have gone away? My link above gives 320 results, yours gives 190. The difference may be no "Reader" check box.

What I do is I go through the next 20 days or so, to see what's coming up. But in both of our searches, I see nothing with a date on it - no shipment dates. They are all "In production". Is that a related or unrelated problem? There seems to be no way to know what's actually coming next via the "Progress" sort.

Here's another example - from my ordered Prepubs, 2 resources are coming in the next 3 days! They are nowhere in your search results, at least in the first 90-100 entries or so that I checked. This leads me to believe other imminent prepubs are missing as well. Where are they?

Per Michael's comment, to look at the next 20 days I will go sometimes close to 10 pages in, depending on the time of year.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301795#Comment_1301795

Hi Nate, here's a bug:

Search for "A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War: How J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis Rediscovered Faith, Friendship, and Heroism in the Cataclysm of 1914-18" (with or without the quotation marks) and it doesn't find that book, even though it's in the dropdown list and matches even a portion of the title typed in.

And Logos does indeed have the book; I can find it through other searches.

Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention! This is definitely a bug (which predated the new search implementation changes) caused by the search as-you-type suggestions showing product titles available in all regions but the actual search results filtering only to "Available to Me" by default. That book is not available in your location which is why you're seeing this behavior. We plan to fix this soon by updating the as-you-type suggestions to also use the default search filters.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301869#Comment_1301869

It's different - I think some of the facets have gone away? My link above gives 320 results, yours gives 190. The difference may be no "Reader" check box.

My link is using only the "Research" edition facet which should explain the difference.

What I do is I go through the next 20 days or so, to see what's coming up. But in both of our searches, I see nothing with a date on it - no shipment dates. They are all "In production". Is that a related or unrelated problem? There seems to be no way to know what's actually coming next via the "Progress" sort.

I compared our previous search results for your search query to the new implementation's results and there is definitely a difference in how the Progress sort is ordering. We are looking into it.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301877#Comment_1301877

Hi Nate, here's a bug:

Search for "A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War: How J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis Rediscovered Faith, Friendship, and Heroism in the Cataclysm of 1914-18" (with or without the quotation marks) and it doesn't find that book, even though it's in the dropdown list and matches even a portion of the title typed in.

And Logos does indeed have the book; I can find it through other searches.

Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention! This is definitely a bug (which predated the new search implementation changes) caused by the search as-you-type suggestions showing product titles available in all regions but the actual search results filtering only to "Available to Me" by default. That book is not available in your location which is why you're seeing this behavior. We plan to fix this soon by updating the as-you-type suggestions to also use the default search filters.

But I already own it. Perhaps the regional restrictions were applied after I bought the book. If you update the as-you-type suggestions, please let them still find books I own, even if I wouldn't be allowed to buy it. I want to know that Logos carries it, before I post a suggestion on the Feedback board. I always (now) try to remember to turn on the "All" button under Geographic Availability before I request books. But if it's a case of only one book in the entire catalog matching my search criteria, then it will show "not found" and then I can't even turn on the "All" button to see if it is there but just geographically restricted.

Thanks for considering my situation. I'm probably one of the most active users on the Feedback board suggesting books Logos should get, so this functionality is important to me but might not be for others.

Leo Wee Fah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301823#Comment_1301823

Despite the official announcement, I didn't see the multitude of users crying out for a change of the shop search - let alone in the direction it has taken. Some few regulars did voice their opinion once in a while regarding small refinements (for which workarounds usually were present). Much more often I seem to remember complaints going in the direction of "the algorithm is okay, fix the wrong/missing metadata to let it work!" Author names (several per individual), languages (often simply missing) and religious group affiliation among other things come to mind.

Right now I'm thinking "if it's not broken, don't fix it" - this would avoid introducing new bugs.

I agree - I think this is a really unhelpful change

Yes, I find it very irritating... Those days I can just typed in the name, and Logos would give a helpful list of books.. now, I got mostly irrelevant items[:'(]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301907#Comment_1301907

Yes, I find it very irritating... Those days I can just typed in the name, and Logos would give a helpful list of books.. now, I got mostly irrelevant items

I have been getting better results - often only the book I am looking for rather than many books with partial matches ... usually ahead of the exact match. It would be interesting to know why we are getting different results - what is different about what we request.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301890#Comment_1301890

Thanks for considering my situation. I'm probably one of the most active users on the Feedback board suggesting books Logos should get, so this functionality is important to me but might not be for others.

Rosie's book suggestions are important to me. They are preponderantly books I do not know exist; she Feedbacks them and I sign up for those of interest.

She brings new possibilities to Logosians and new sources of income to Logos.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301890#Comment_1301890

Thanks for considering my situation. I'm probably one of the most active users on the Feedback board suggesting books Logos should get, so this functionality is important to me but might not be for others.

I agree with Rosie that it is important to be able to see ALL that is available.

Steve Adams

I have two problems with this ...

1. The number of products returned is limited to 1000 before all filters have been applied.
For example, if I filter for "Unowned" and "Commentaries", I only get 208 results, and many of the most relevant results are excluded.
You have applied one of the filters, cut off the results at 1000, and then applied the other filter.
I would prefer you to apply both filters, sort them by relevance, and then limit the results.

2. The 1000 product limit is also applied before sorting.
If I filter for "Pre-Pub" and sort by "Progress" and I get 1000 results, but many resources that are "Gathering Interest" are included, whereas others that are "Shipping Soon" are not.
I would prefer you to sort all the Pre-Pubs and then show me the first 1000.

I am unable to find the books I want to buy at the moment, so this is costing you money.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301916#Comment_1301916

If I filter for "Pre-Pub" and sort by "Progress" and I get 1000 results, but many resources that are "Gathering Interest" are included, whereas others that are "Shipping Soon" are not.

I saw the same yesterday - but: the results are not sorted by progress at all, IIRC a resource gathering interest was on top, sprinkled below between some in production I found a resource shipping today etc. This is ridiculous.

I am unable to find the books I want to buy at the moment, so this is costing you money.

yep.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301921#Comment_1301921

I click Browse All Books. I get 104,135 books. [Logos has already set Available To Me.] <<.

[This is good.]

I click Unowned. I get 1,616 books. <<. Logos is trippin' !!!!!!

: My first click has always been Unowned. This only makes sense. Or used to, before this poor, new system made searches worse.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301921#Comment_1301921

the results are not sorted by progress at all, IIRC a resource gathering interest was on top, sprinkled below between some in production I found a resource shipping today etc.

The change in behavior for the "Progress" sort for pre-pubs is a known bug and we are actively working on a fix.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301933#Comment_1301933

Thanks!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301922#Comment_1301922

I click Unowned. I get 1,616 books. <<. Logos is trippin' !!!!!!

: My first click has always been Unowned. This only makes sense. Or used to, before this poor, new system made searches worse.

Inaccurate search result counts is one of the limitations of the new system. If you apply more specific filters or search queries after applying the "Unowned" filter you will likely see more accurate counts because there are fewer products for the system to count.

Note that the returned results are accurate. You should not be seeing any owned products when applying the "Unowned" filter. You should also be able to page through many pages of results without issue.

What is Logos going to do about it?

We understand that the inaccurate result and facet counts are disconcerting, especially when it comes to ownership, and are looking into solutions to improve the user experience. For example, we could say "Showing page 1 of thousands of results" instead of an inaccurate number (Google search used to do this) or we could not show any result count at all and implement continuous/infinite scrolling (this is the current Google search experience).

Why is this issue occurring?

The new solution prioritizes showing the first page of results for your search as quickly as possibly. It does not expect that users will manually navigate to page 100 of the results for the "Unowned" filter without any other filters or searches applied and thus it chooses to estimate the total results instead of counting them in order to return the first page of results faster. The Unowned filter in particular seems to exhibit this problem more than any other filter. Ownership filtering is a difficult problem (every user owns a different set of resources and products to filter out) which contributes to the count inaccuracy because the system can't cache results counts across all users; your counts are different than everyone else's. Our old system did provide accurate counts but this came at a high performance cost on our servers, especially during times of heavy site traffic, and much slower response times for users who owned many products.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301937#Comment_1301937

Ok, the counts can't count. I assume because the results are being streamed.

But the magic FL partner is barely a hint better than before.

This AM, in another thread I was curious about, Logos.com gave me an alternative search (below). Kudos, it did find the search text in the title. Progress. But then, it began looking for 'the's' with considerable success. Looks like, it's zero'd in on my deleted wish list, and is happily finding 'the's'.

After a while it then started noticing phrase matches in book titles (eg Dead Sea Scrolls). Whoa, there, boy .. are you certain you found all the 'the's'?

I don't know what the FL partner is promising, but it looks stupid (to an uninformed customer, as an example).

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301937#Comment_1301937

For example, we could say "Showing page 1 of thousands of results" instead of an inaccurate number (Google search used to do this)

Seems wise to me

Steve Adams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1301916#Comment_1301916

Here is another illustration of the 1000 product limit being applied too soon.

If I search for all "Unowned" products, ordered by "Price (lowest first)", I should get the cheapest 1000 products that I don't own.
Instead, you fetch 1000 products in database order, exclude the ones I already own, leaving only 306, and then sort them by price.
The count IS accurate. I can only scroll through 306 products. Most of the cheap books that I do not own are not shown.