BUGs and issues with Tillägg till GT -82 (Swedish Apocrypha)

Answering another post reminded me that I haven't had time to report that there seems to be something missing here Wink :

Where am I supposed to write the reference? And shouldn't there be a parallel resources button as well?

Also: should these kinds of issues with Swedish resources be reported to you or to SN?

Furthermore:

• These Apocrypha were explicitly published as a 'Supplement to Bibel -82'. I would therefore expect to be able to enter a reference to e g 1 Maccabees when I'm in Bibel -82, and have Logos take me directly to the Supplement, in the same tab. Or if I have Bibel -82 linked to NRSVCE or LXX, I would expect it to move over to the Supplement automatically, if I scroll one of the others into the Apocrypha. Just as a linked commentary set switches book automatically. Currently this does not happen. I have to open the Supplement separately every time, and then use the TOC to find the reference. Could you please inform the software that these two belong together?

• Crossreferences from Bibel -82 to the Apocrypha/Supplement are not linked:

Here too I have to open the Supplement separately every time, and then use the TOC to find the reference.

• If I press F7 when I'm in the Supplement, nothing happens. If I have Text Comparison open, nothing shows up.

• If I look at what I believe is the exact same translation of the Apocrypha, but now included in Bibel 2000, then I do get the reference box, the parallel resources button and the Text Comparison -- but now the footnotes and cross references are missing instead (which do show up in the Supplement). In fact, these seem to be missing in the entire Bibel 2000.

• Not about the Apocrypha specifically, but Swedish popups insist on turning up like this, and it looks a bit funny:

Obviously the headings belong to the following paragraphs, not the preceding ones...

(I have to admit, though, that this one is quite a funny omission:

How can one possibly omit 'B' in 'Bibeln' without noticing it, when it's a) this huge, and b) the very first letter of the very first word in the entire resource? Big Smile (That one is definitely not your fault, though.))

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Melissa Snyder

Some resources do not have a current reference box. This may have been overlooked for this particular resource.

"Bibel-82" is indexed for "Bible (Bibel82)" but "Tillägg Till GT-82" does not show an index. (Click the resource information icon (?) to find the associated Indexes.)

In my "Bibel 2000" the "B" appears to be replaced by a box for an unprintable character. A box appears further down on the title page, too, under Svenska Bibelsällskapet. I'll look into who to contact about these issues.

Edit: The problems described above occur in the Windows version, too.

Thank you.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/222372#Comment_222372

Thanks for replying. I was beginning to consider bumping it. Please let me know what you find out. Especially if it turns out that I should have contacted the Swedish guys rather than you.

Also: a) Metadata corrections for Swedish resources; you or SN? b) Does reporting typos the normal way work or not? I suddenly discovered that a bit below that big missing B it says that typos should be reported to SN's weblink or e-mail, which would, of course, take considerably longer time than doing it within Logos. Old L3 information or actually necessary?

HJ. van der Wal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/222869#Comment_222869

Thank you fgh for drawing my attention to the Bibel-82. I have been eying the products on the Swedish page for some time now, especially the Lilla Bibelstudiepaketet, but I hadn't paid any attention to the Bibel-82 before. However, with all the prepubs coming out (and the Twitter sale) it will take some time before I can justify buying a Swedish Bible.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/223198#Comment_223198

Thank you fgh for drawing my attention to the Bibel-82

I actually mentioned it to you in one of those other threads some days ago. I don't remember what I said about it, but I know I mentioned it.

It's the one I use. 1917 is far too much "KJV", and I don't particularly like the theological approach in 2000. And, of course, it's the one I'm used to. Swedish isn't English. We're much more "one translation at a time" (though I now have to listen to another one in church). It has the 1981 NT, and a slight revision of the 1917 OT (getting rid of the plural forms of the verb and some other antiquated stuff). The major downside, beside the Apocrypha being a separate resource, is that there are hardly any foot notes at all in the OT. I wish I could read just the notes from 2000 with the text from 1982! But, then, as you could read above, I can't see those notes in 2000 either. Don't know what's wrong. The webpage doesn't say anything about them not being included.

As for cost, check the webpage regularly. They seem to always have one or two items on sale. Usually for quite some time, but during Advent they switched every week. I wish I had waited until then to buy Allsvenskan! Would have saved me 500 SEK, if I remember correctly.

Melissa Snyder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/222869#Comment_222869

Thanks for replying. I was beginning to consider bumping it. Please let me know what you find out. Especially if it turns out that I should have contacted the Swedish guys rather than you.

We are looking into correcting as many of the issues in the Bible as we can.

Also: a) Metadata corrections for Swedish resources; you or SN? b) Does reporting typos the normal way work or not? I suddenly discovered that a bit below that big missing B it says that typos should be reported to SN's weblink or e-mail, which would, of course, take considerably longer time than doing it within Logos. Old L3 information or actually necessary?

a) Post metadata corrections here: http://wiki.logos.com/Metadata_correction_proposals.
b) Report typos to us.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/223572#Comment_223572

Thanks a lot, Melissa!

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/223572#Comment_223572

Thanks a lot for having fixed most of this! Most grateful!

Looks like all the issues with Bibel 82 and the Apocrypha are gone. Just the ones in Bibel 2000 remaining. But then I haven't gotten an update for Bibel 2000, so they couldn't very well be gone yet. [:)]

HJ. van der Wal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/241408#Comment_241408

Shalom fgh!

I noticed this weekend that Bibel 2000 and the Svenska Folkbibeln are currently on sale. Since right now I can only afford to buy one Bible (unless the Talmud Collection and JBL will be delayed [:)]), I'm hoping you can give me some advice. Could you tell me which of these two Bibles is closer to colloquial Swedish? Do they both contain footnotes? Or should I go for the third option and wait till Bibel-82 is on sale?

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/241479#Comment_241479

I'm hoping you can give me some advice. Could you tell me which of these two Bibles is closer to colloquial Swedish?

Not really, since I don't use either. You can check them out online:

2000: Wikipedia; website.

SFB: Wikipedia; website.

Do they both contain footnotes?

2000 certainly should, but as you can see above it currently doesn't. SFB seems to have cross references, but not notes. It too ought to have notes, but much fewer by the looks of that website. Also, SFB doesn't include the Apocrypha.

Sakarias Ingolfsson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/241479#Comment_241479

I seldom read writings in swedish, and I do not own a hardcopy of a swedish bible. (But when I do, I enjoy it ;-)) Having said that I would lean towards SFB. While Bibel 2000 has been characterized as scientific, the producers of SFB wanted the faith to be an integral part of the translation process. That, of course, is not sufficient reason, but it is a start. Both of them are fairly recent, and should use understandable language. From what little experience I have with SFB, I have no problems with the language.

During the translation process of Bibel 2000, the translators created a vast archive of notes and comments. For study purposes you should be able to gain access to the archive. My mentor for my master thesis suggested this to me, but it never came to that. I cant say how difficult it is, or if it is worth the hazzle, but you could check it out. I think the archive is located in Örebro, but I cant remember for sure.

HJ. van der Wal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244273#Comment_244273

Thank you both for the advice! I had forgotten about the notes not being visible in Bibel 2000.

I had already checked the Swedish Wikipedia and concluded that I would like the SFB better. The only thing is that I would also like to buy the Studiebibeln kommentarer (or at least the Svensk Studiebibel), so in the end it will probably be better for me just to wait untill I can buy the Lilla Bibelstudiepaket. But if the Bibel-82 ever is on sale, I will go for that one.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244312#Comment_244312

As for the notes, I'm still hoping for an update of 2000 later (and hopefully Melissa noticed my discovery above that they're missing in SFB as well).

I probably shouldn't say this (but then these resources aren't sold directly by Logos...), but if you wait a while, you could probably make PBBs of SFB and 2000 for free. (And if you spend the saved money with Logos, they haven't lost anything, so I don't intend to feel guilty about mentioning it [:P]) I don't think you can find a free electronic file for 1982, though.

Melissa Snyder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244356#Comment_244356

As for the notes, I'm still hoping for an update of 2000 later (and hopefully Melissa noticed my discovery above that they're missing in SFB as well).

I probably shouldn't say this (but then these resources aren't sold directly by Logos...), but if you wait a while, you could probably make PBBs of SFB and 2000 for free. (And if you spend the saved money with Logos, they haven't lost anything, so I don't intend to feel guilty about mentioning it ) I don't think you can find a free electronic file for 1982, though.

Both copies of the SFB in my Library (SFB-98 and SFB NT-96) have footnotes included in the text. Are these the notes you are referring to?

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244530#Comment_244530

Both copies of the SFB in my Library (SFB-98 and SFB NT-96) have footnotes included in the text.

You are quite right! Either I was blind yesterday, or I checked before updating to SR 5 and something fixed itself when I did. Or something weird is going on. In any case they're there now. In SFB 98, that is; in Bibel 2000 I still can't see any. Well, one problem less to solve. Sorry to have bothered you unnecessarily.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244551#Comment_244551

All but one of the problems in this thread were solved last spring, but, in spite of an update to Bibel 2000 two months after the post above, I still can't see any footnotes and cross references in it. Is anything happening on this front?

Tonya J Ross

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/374616#Comment_374616

The case for this issue is still active.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/375377#Comment_375377

The case for this issue is still active

Very glad to hear it, but does that mean that someone's actively working on putting those footnotes in, or just that it's on someone's list of things to do some time in the future when they find the time?

Even though this isn't my personal Bible of choice, it is the official Bible of most churches in Sweden today, including mine, so fixing it ought to be rather high priority. And, as Bibel 82 doesn't have any OT footnotes, I kind of miss them as well.

Jannie van Niekerk

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/375397#Comment_375397

Very glad to hear it, but does that mean that someone's actively working on putting those footnotes in, or just that it's on someone's list of things to do some time in the future when they find the time?

According to what I'm seeing, VS_2000("Bibel 2000") never had any footnotes in the Logos version of the resource. The issue has changed from "its a book bug" to "its the source files we got", which is handled totally different. I've forwarded the request to the appropriate persons for follow up.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/375470#Comment_375470

According to what I'm seeing, VS_2000("Bibel 2000") never had any footnotes in the Logos version of the resource. The issue has changed from "its a book bug" to "its the source files we got", which is handled totally different. I've forwarded the request to the appropriate persons for follow up.

I'm grateful you're looking into it, but I hope you understand that it makes me very disappointed to learn that it's taken you 16 months just to figure that out (and even then only because I brought it up again). That's 16 lost months in which, seemingly, nothing whatsoever has happened.

As you can see on http://www.bibeln.se/las/2k/1_mos it should have both footnotes, cross references and text critical notes (see Noter, Parallellhänvisningar and Textkritiska anmärkningar in the right column). And there was no mention whatsoever that the notes weren't included when I bought it, so they should be.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/375716#Comment_375716

Bump.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/375716#Comment_375716

According to what I'm seeing, VS_2000("Bibel 2000") never had any footnotes in the Logos version of the resource. The issue has changed from "its a book bug" to "its the source files we got", which is handled totally different. I've forwarded the request to the appropriate persons for follow up.

I'm grateful you're looking into it, but I hope you understand that it makes me very disappointed to learn that it's taken you 16 months just to figure that out (and even then only because I brought it up again). That's 16 lost months in which, seemingly, nothing whatsoever has happened.

As you can see on http://www.bibeln.se/las/2k/1_mos it should have both footnotes, cross references and text critical notes (see Noter, Parallellhänvisningar and Textkritiska anmärkningar in the right column). And there was no mention whatsoever that the notes weren't included when I bought it, so they should be.

Another 11 months without even a reply...

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/489222#Comment_489222

Another 11 months without even a reply...

I contacted Jannie to see what's up, and he wrote back, "It's really not a resource issue per se. I did let our publisher relations team know back when I said I did. Working with publishers is a slow turning wheel!" So the ball is not in his court anymore, and Publisher Relations likely has other higher priority stuff to work on, or else they've already requested updated files for this resource from the publisher and it's taking the publisher this long to provide them.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/489285#Comment_489285

I don't think Jannie is a he.[:P]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/489310#Comment_489310

I don't think Jannie is a he.

Are you so sure? Jannie is a nickname for the Dutch name Jan (pronounced yahn; cognate of the English name John), and all the Jannie van Niekerks listed on LinkedIn (mostly from South Africa) are males. I confess I do not personally know the Jannie at Logos, but it's highly likely to be a male, which is why I used the pronoun he.