Sorting not working (online)

morgain13
When I click on Creator to make it lead the sorting of the bibliog it does sort A- Z kind of.

But first of all, the first view I get starts at the end of the alphabet which is not intuitive. You expect to see As and Bs first, not Ws.

Then if I click again to invert the order I get listings which are out of order. Ive checked there is no space on the left of their Creator fields, to make them come first, none there. They look like ordinary listings to me - a Book, a few Web Pages.
Then in the middle of a series of items by Annwyl, there is an Anon, and a Barton.

These are not multiple authors, and they all display perfectly in order on the client.

I also find it surprising that the default view sorts by Title, instead of Creator. Almost all bibliographies sort on the author/ creator so this looks very unconventional. Like a child's library shelf, not adult bibliog. (Sorry, but that's how it looks)
  • adamsmith
    Like a child's library shelf, not adult bibliog. (Sorry, but that's how it looks)
    please do cut out the metaphors. You're making people less inclined to be interested in what you say, let alone want to help you if you're belittling them.
  • morgain13
    I'm so sorry but it's difficult to know how to say it.
    I do admire Zotero a great deal - that's why Ive been hard at it loading up and exploring its features. It's way better than other alternatives. Thee's so much that is quick and intuitive and well structured.

    I've seen this effect before. I call it the Perfection Shock Effect.
    You find software which sets up easily, you can do all kinds of things quickly and comfortably. From amazed admiration you relax into easygoing usage ..... until SHOCK this perfect Eden suddenly has something that doesn't work!
    On a lesser system it's groan oh dear, but not unexpected. On a Perfection system like Zotero it's a Shock and the reaction is dsiorienting. The result can look grumpy - sorry sorry sorry.

    I'm saying a list of items which don't seem to sort alphabetically doesn't look good.
    Maybe I've glitched. If so I need to know how.
    The aim is just to get a tidy sort and I don't know why it's not doing that.
  • adamsmith
    It's perfectly fine to to point out things that you think should work better/differently. That's why the forum has a feature request category.
    There's no need to add dramatic effect, if devs agree that you have a point they'll implement what you suggest as resources permit.
  • fcheslack
    The default when you click title should be the lexicographic ordering you expect. It should reverse only when you click it again. This is working for me, if it's not for you it's a bug.

    Looking at your group library and sorting by creator the first several entries do in fact have leading spaces (and are single field, even when they're comma separated).
  • morgain13
    fcheslack thank you so much - fixed it beautifully.

    For anyone else who gets this problem, checking 'leading spaces' at the start of a field like Title, Author etc is best done online where the sizing of everything is much bigger.
    I was checking for initial spaces on these out-of-place items but checking on the client. It has small neat boxes making a beginner space hard to spot.
    (you can make the client sizing bigger using the icon far right on top bar "Toggle Tab Mode" but even then spacing is not as obvious as it is online.
  • adamsmithpresentatio
    @fcheslack - I agree btw. that sorting by author is a more natural default - any reason against that?
  • fcheslack
    There are only a few fields that are guarenteed to be present and meaningful for sorting purposes for all items. Title, dateAdded and dateModified.
  • morgain13
    Author is definitely what scholars expect. I hope this can be added, or else replace dateAdded.
    If it's a choice about space, the last update is useful (dateModified) but having both dateModified and dateAdded is close to duplication when at the top level of key info.
    When looking up an academic item people generally want Author Title and Date. The rest is detail to access by opening the individual file.
    Again given pressure of space I can see dropping Date - although if you have a list of different editions of the same work, it's going to be a bit fristrating to open them individually to get the one you want.
    However Author is just the main item above all.
  • adamsmith
    fcheslack's point above is that author may not be present and meaningful for all item types - e.g. legislation and cases. Same with date. So it's not a great default. Anyone can, obviously, customize their custom columns and those save across libraries when logged in.
  • morgain13
    Thank you Adam I can under stand better now.
    Would be nice to have a Like or Thank you click here - It's a good experience on both sides as you don't end up clicking messages open which don't need a reply but you still get thanked.
Sign In or Register to comment.