For a really major ver. release (which I welcome next Year): Intra-testamental sourcing of the OT incl Deuterocanonicals, of parallels & of theologies

[Unix]

Text-comparisons, plus curations (with methodology and some of the detail-choices cited) of theology.

 

I would like to have an effective way for doing a thing like this that would allow me to choose which version of the Biblical story to read (which is messy, I know) intra-testamentally speaking, and show me selections of OT theologies that are OT-sourced - as a start that it would at least list which OT theologies including monographs on narrow topics that broadly and strongly base conclusions made on our behalf, on the OT.
I would gladly welcome such a feature as this one, to have lots of prerequisites in form of monographs: Such as OTL monographs. So I don't mean for OakTree to produce a vast completely proprietary database which would require authors to sit down for many Months just writing tirelessly. But more like sourcing what's offered and that future resource releases would be checked for possible inclusion in this feature.
EDIT: So to clarify I want text-comparison-algorithms and such search functionality, meaning both analysis done by OakTree and effetivised searches I can make, that pave the way for comparing texts of many different lenghts, with each others, that come from the Biblical text itself, and that come from theologies, that minimises also the need for the end-user to manually enter a whole host of synonyms. I think there is automations and AI already existing that can be learned from or perhaps licensed that has been developed for other fields of text-comparison.

 

It would be instrumental that it would include Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and 1-2 Maccabees, perhaps also 4 Maccabees. I would say there is fairly unanimous agreement about the value, usefullness and canonicity of including these three books. I see these constantly referenced in the most recent monograps and dictionaries, up to hundreds of times per volume.

 

If adding ingenuiety in the form of that more abstract, more modern, or just established but not always attested concepts could be browsed and link to actual occurences of search words that the feature would help the user to compile, that would be awesome!

 

EDIT2: Not wanting same for the NT because aren't a lot of things based either mainly just on the NT or a bewildering hodgepodge of NT &OT sans Apocrypha?
See what there is resource-wise currently offered and test a few ellaborate (meaning which can be saved, further developed, packaged and sold in an upgrade) searches in them internally!
I don't myself require this feature I'm kindly asking for, to be released WITH libraries that have lots and lots of the sources needed, but be it the choice of Your discretion and hand-curation of libraries!
EDIT3: I'm suggesting this for further competitiviness in a unique way to care for customers!

Edited July 17, 2018 by Unix

[Unix]

By this reply to myself I'd like to by this comment stress two things mainly:
1) That my objective by mentioning AI was that that goes back to the first words of the post: Text-comparisons. Enable side-by-side machine comparison aided by AI!
2) We're on version 12.2.9 with an unknown version step ahead awaiting as the next one. (If next version is 12.3 I'm all happy about that.) I now postpone the complete suggestion I have, for version 14.0.x for which I'll easily happily wait another three Years, if it has an impact on average quality of Library resources.

 

I'm sorry about the complexity of my OP but point 1) clarifies that.
Unique way for caring for customers You see!
With the manageable amount of resources I think this would be the right time to start building on both databases and machine comparison, for a future version release!

 

I try to limit my input to comments and making posts that matter. I know or can very well imagine a huge amount of work, not always estimable in advance, would go into development of categorising each book and even reading through. My suggestion, if it is now more clear, was because I thought of it as a potential, if developed and then released, selling point.

Thanks on my behalf for Your time, scholars!

[Unix]

The comparisons would be within the kind of resources I mentioned and with the layout You can imagine from what I said.

What kind of browsing? Perhaps carroted. Or rather somehow made so that it is possible to choose between search-terms

[Unix]

For example choosing whether to read from the books of Kings or from the books of Chronicles.

And carrot-browsing with methodologies presented of how the outlines of them have been made, of theologies. Source the existing books. Incremental adding of now forthcoming books should be easier