Dear Accordance, pt. 1

[Natan Rubenstein]

Dear Accordance,

 

Thanks for your app and your hard work. I have a few requests that I hope you will soon address in your software.

 

1. DSSB-C/M. I mainly use this module to cut and paste. But the simplistic method used to cross-index the text with the so-called biblical text makes for such a frustrating experience, I normally end up typing it out. For those of us who know this literature well, the cross references are fairly redundant to have in the text for two reasons:

a. A scholar will know the text.

b. It parallels with the Hebrew Bible.

2. Repeat 1, 1a, 1b with the Ben Sira module in mind (and also please separate these out to a module for Ms A, B, C, D, E, F). Right now, these modules are problematic for getting precise search results.

3. Point one raises another issue I have with DSSB-C/M and Qumran. Please create accompanying modules for each scroll and fragment, in accordance with the format as done in DJD. You claim these modules are transcriptions of DJD, then please make them appear as much in the presentation of the data. Your competitor, Logos, oddly enough has the upper hand on you here.

4. Since I mentioned cut and paste, I get a pesky directional arrow in Mellel. This often occurs with the redundant (parenthesized) verse references. Please handle the data better. I purchased these modules mainly to save time from having to type in DJD related reconstructions in my research, but oddly I spend more time editing out the problems. Not good. I find it somewhat odd that a company whose leitmotif is the primacy of the text handles its digital reconstructions in such a cavalier manner.

 

I have many more items to bring to your attention, but for now I please ask for you to consider these critiques. I offer them here in the hopes that they will be heard and I believe should you implement them, you will have shown a great deal about your care for scholarly accuracy.

 

 

kul tov,

 

Natan Rubenstein

[Helen Brown]

Natan:

 

We do appreciate your feedback, but you are asking for major changes in the way these texts are presented, changes that have not been requested in the past 10 years or so.

 

I do not understand why the combined BENSIRA-M which does separate out the MSS, is still a problem for you. You can create ranges in order to search the specific MSS. If these were separate modules, they could not be searched together. The same applies to DSSB-M.

 

The directional arrow depends on the font you use.

 

I think we could offer an option to hide the embedded cross-references. We would not remove them as not every user is a scholar.

 

I will pass your comments on to Dr. Martin Abegg.

[Martin Abegg]

Natan:

 

I am the guy behind the data in the modules you mention (DSSB, BENSIRA). Although most of your comments touch on the interface, I might be able to both encourage your cause (interface changes) and help you with modules as they are currently displayed.

 

To begin, the decision to split the data for DSSB and BENSIRA into two modules—canonical view © and manuscript view (M)—was the result of a lengthy discussion between Roy Brown and myself. I can honestly admit that I was hoping for a more "elegant" solution, but this is the best we could come up with at the time. Perhaps it is time to review this decision once again. That said, I must say that I have found the presentation to be quite workable and—as I am sure you can imagine—I use these modules daily for nearly every aspect of my scholarly work: research, writing, class lectures, student papers, theses .... Only my wife and kids are closer (and they might debate that fact!).

 

So some comments to your points beyond the layout:

 

1. I personally find the embedded references quite helpful. That said, I could wish they were smaller (perhaps just the verse/liine number that could be moused over to reveal the whole) and I would find it useful to be able toggle them off at times.

 

2. As to your point about the various mss in BENSIRA, perhaps you are not aware of the possibilities present in BENSIRA-M. Here you can see the individual mss (search by "reference") and search individual mss by"words." The latter can be easily done "on the fly" by using the [Range X] seach function, or you can establish permanent ranges in the "search conditions" pop-up. I use this tactic regularly. Perhaps, as an interface upgrade, individual mss could be displayed and searched canonically as well. But, I do not find the lack of this ability especially troublesome.

 

3. Creating an appearance of DJD is not something very high on my wish-list (just give me the data, man!) so you'll have to "rally your own troups" here. Regarding the kind of information you might expect to find in DJD-like headers, you do know that if you open the DSS-Index in a parallel pane (or amplify to it) that you have the key mss data right at your fingertips (only for DSSB, QUMRAN, and JUDEAN at the moment).

 

4. The Mellel issue is not one I can speak to. But I do know at each word processor has it's own parameters for copying and pasting. And it's a moving target. Tough stuff for programmers.

 

Hope this helps to some degree! Back to work.

 

and thanks for using my data!

 

marty abegg