sort database: questions & requests

Reiner · Post by **Reiner** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:16 am

some remarks, questions and maybe feature requests about I "Refs > Sort Database...":

1. why is it only possible to sort a database if a reference window is in front? this is not very user friendly imho.

2. if I sort my references in the list view I would expect them to appear in the same order in the reference view. I can't see any reason for this being different from my expectations. maybe somebody can enlighten me? It would be the very easiest to use if the order of the list view would be exactly the same like the order off the references automatically.

now I can't see any possibility to synchronize both orders because I have edited books with empty authors-fields. in the list view the editors are shown (like I would expect it to be). but if I sort the rerences manually by the author these entries are treated as if the have no author instead of using the editors-field instead.

3. I don't understand why the Hitlist and All References are different sorted even if the Hitlist contains all references of the database?

4. also I don't understand how I can sort the hitlist?

5. what are the ID#? where do they come from? can they be influenced by the user?

Post by **Jon** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:36 am

Sort database sorts the actual records in the database. It has no affect on the display in lists (unless you choose to have the List View open unsorted, an option in Preferences).

For this and your other questions about unique ID and the like, please get the User Guide and read it for details.

Jon
Sonny Software

Reiner · Post by **Reiner** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:44 am

Jon wrote:Sort database sorts the actual records in the database. It has no affect on the display in lists

what do you mean with actual records?

I know that list view and sort database are independet from each other but I would request that they are *not* independent (at least optional). I can't understand why they are independent and do not finde any hint to that in the user guide.

Jon wrote:(unless you choose to have the List View open unsorted, an option in Preferences).

thanks for this tipp, which is better than nothing.

but what argument stays against synchronizing list view order and reference order? this would be very user friendly imho.

Reiner wrote:1. why is it only possible to sort a database if a reference window is in front? this is not very user friendly imho.

sorry, but I can't find an answer to this question in the user guide.

and sorry for asking questions which are answered in the guide. ich checked the guide before asking, but only for my first question and then while posting the other questions came to my mind.

Post by **Jon** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:55 am

Reiner wrote:what do you mean with actual records?

The order the references are stored in the database. This typically has nothing to do with the order in which they are displayed (which is usually sorted).

I know that list view and sort database are independet from each other but I would request that they are *not* independent (at least optional). I can't understand why they are independent and do not finde any hint to that in the user guide.

It is in the User Guide. That's what the setting in Preferences to sort lists (or not) is for.

1. why is it only possible to sort a database if a reference window is in front? this is not very user friendly imho.

Because it is confusing to the user to sort the database and not see any change in the List View (which they won't). They will immediately see the change in the reference view, though. It is mostly for people who use the reference window as the primary view that this option is provided. Sort Database is not something you would find helpful, so ignore it.

Jon
Sonny Software