I want to change the color of the hotlinks in Logos 4 like I was ablt to do in Libronix. Does anyone know how?
I miss how Libronix distinguished Bible hot links from other types of texts and definition hot links by the color. This was very useful in complex works such as the BDAG Greek lexicon, which has many types of links on one page. It is now harder to distinguish biblical links from non-biblical links and definitions of abbreviations. I hope they bring it back.
I also Wish they would highlight search results for each search in a different color as they did in Libronix. It helps when you have multiple searches open at the same time.
Does anyone know how?
act., adj., acc., adv., alt., aor., cf., comp., conj.
dat., demon., e.g., etc., f, f, ff, fem., fut., gen., i.e., impers.
impf., impv., ind., inf., interj., interrog, intrans., lit., m, masc.
midd., mng., n, neut., nom., NT, obj., opt., OT, pass., pers.
pf., pl., plpf., prep., pres., pro., ptc., sg., sp., subj., superl., trans.
This is something that has been requested before. I'm sure they have it on some long internal list of "maybe we'll do this someday if we run out of higher priority features we want to add." Bob Pritchett thinks there is relatively little demand for this, and they purposely removed the multi-colored hotlinks because they thought they were garish and ugly. We've had a hard time convincing him that it's more than just a personal preference of a small but vocal minority; it's an accessibility issue. The subtle dark blue color isn't different enough from the background color for users with poor color vision to distinguish. But Bob insists that the notion of looking through a text hoping to find interesting links to click on and explore is so old-fashioned and nobody does that anymore. They actually wanted the links to disappear and be non-intrusive. Here is a post from Bob where he's defended their position on this and ridiculed the request to change it back, but he will reluctantly comply if enough of us ask for it. He's a businessman, after all.
So go vote for it on UserVoice.
I HOPE they do NOT bring it back. In Libronix, the resulting hotlinks were garish, often in poor taste, and really took the shine off of Libronix. True, it made Libronix easier to read, see links and so forth. But that's beside the point.
Now, Logos4 is completely different. The subtle greys, bumping up against the muted blues. Just a riot of artistic and carefully designed creativity.
Logos4 got (another) award for how pretty it looks (I doubt the awarders were Bible software users, but who knows).
So, let's not tip the canoe over. Just two evenings ago, at our dinner party, we had Logos framed on the wall. The complements just blew us away.
Let's NOT go back to the 'useful for Bible study' world again.
(Now admittedly, reading the new Hermeneia Enoch volume in Logos4 format was a journey in mousing around to find the links. But it's just the cost of good taste.)
It's not beside the point, it is exactly the point. Users who need this feature because of vision issues should have this option available to turn on these colour choices. Leave it as it is by default but allow those with special needs to have more accessibility support. I find it really sad when users are thoughtless and think only of themselves and not the needs of others. [:(].
I have no need at this point for the different colour, but maybe someday I will, and right now I'd be very happy to have them their if it makes the software much more accessible for others. I don't believe anyone is asking for a high visibility colour scheme to be imposed on all users so don't understand why people have to knock the needs requests of others for an option to make links more visible for them. For what its worth, I've added 3 votes to users voice on this idea. Logos really needs to change its mindset on things like this issue.
I've been reading 'Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek' by Thorleif Boman. Chalk this up to my own limited knowledge, but the greeks literally had a word for an argument that was so unbelievable, it demonstrated the opposite. Boman got a lot of grief for his efforts (hebrew vs greek) but at least his observations are very interesting.
I have tried working with visual filters to accomplish the same results as L3 and it is a mess. It is especially difficult where we want it most, like BDAG. For example, how do you distinguish between acc. (accusative case) and acc. to (according to). The filter picks up Ac 16:6 when the syntax in the filter is act. (active voice), and that is with Match Case checked. Etc. Etc. Some like fruit cake, some don't, give us a choice. (It's ok if its fresh, but I prefer all things chocolate, except in my software.)
Edit: (I was unaware that Bob had said, "-- and we'll reconsider giving you control over hyperlink color in an upcoming release, as much as we are reluctant to add more option settings..", so I guess there is hope. Thanks Rosie for asking that this be reconsidered!)
A visual filter can change the color for a number of lexicon links:
Keep Smiling [:)]
