When working with the Citations Used within a Source (Master Source), there is inconsistency of how the three columns are sorted. This makes the user to have to pay very close attention before adding or deleting. Reference the picture for where these are inconsistencies.
The sorting of the 2nd column is done based on the entry.
Recommendation: Retain the name alphabetically sorting of the name, but have the type column to be the next sorting in alphabetical order, then the Date column to be sorted in a date order. The would only be used when there are duplicate facts relating to the source. So, priority sorting is Name, second sorting is the type (Fact) and third is the date.
Mine are but keep in mind they are sorted in character order not necessarily straight AlphaNumeric
So I guess we need to know the entire logic of how things are being sorted.
May I make an alternative suggestion ? …
Make all 3 columns (date, type, name) user-sortable via a mouse click. Bonus points if multi-sort is enabled.
3 Likes
Agreed. I made the same suggestion not long ago. And, added that the Date and fact Type column widths should either automatically expand to the length of the text, or, when the user adjusts those widths that setting should be retained.
1 Like