 |
 |
I few years ago we evaluated Lectrix rather carefully in comparison with Alpheios. Its chief advantage was the same as its chief disadvantage, it linked into the Cambridge commentaries and texts and did not work effectively with anything else, while the Alpheios tools had no access to the Cambridge commentaries but worked with any html found anywhere. Michael Sharp and I had some exploratory discussions about collaboration , but their reliance at the time on Adobe flash was an obstacle. I heard indirectly that they planned to abandon flash, for which there is surely less and less justification, but there was also some concern among the several institutions that were evaluating it on a trial basis that they had too few commentaries available to justify the price, and the pipeline for producing new commentaries was so venerably ponderous that rectification of this situation seemed unlikely in the near future. If Lectrix had been free and somewhat differently designed, with somewhat broader functionality, we probably would not have bothered creating alpheios, since the fundamental purpose- providing a flexible reading support environment for students and scholars was quite similar. In the meantime alpheios has added support for Arabic and Biblical Greek and hopes soon to add similar support for several other classical languages that a scholar might plausibly wish to consult simultaneously, eg Syriac and Hebrew. At this moment in time a reading environment that is focused exclusively on Greek and Latin would seem to be a bit narrow even for scholars who work primarily with Greek and Latin- IMHO. But perhaps the latest Lectrix is significantly enhanced, in which case Cambridge might want to emphasize its novelty more emphatically than its web site does at the moment. On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Charles E. Jones <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Do any of you have opinions (aside from on the price) on the Cambridge > product Lectrix? > http://lexctrix.cambridge.org > > Thanks, > > -Chuck Jones- > >