Sort order in Paragraph Catalog inconsistent / incorrect

b Problem Description:
Sort order of paragraph styles INCONSISTENT/INCORRECT when compared to standard alphabetical sort. From the Paragraph Catalog, or when I select F9, styles starting with "1a_" sort before styles starting with "1_". If a table with the style names is sorted, "1_" comes before "1a_".
This sort order worked correctly in FM7.2. In FM8.x, it started sorting incorrectly. Our template was designed based on the standard sort order for characters, which somehow changed starting in FM8.x.
b Steps to Reproduce:
Generated a list of para styles in our template, converted to table, sorted, and compared to the Paragraph Catalog.
b Actual Result:
1a_Heading1_NoTOC
b out of order
1k_Title_Kit
b out of order
1_Heading1
1_Heading1TOC
2a_Heading2_NoTOC
b out of order
2_Heading2
2_Heading2TOC
3_Heading3
4_Heading4
5_Heading_RunIn
6_Heading_Subtopic
7a_Heading_SGD_Command
b out of order
7a_Heading_SGD_CommandTOC
b out of order
7b_Heading_ZBI_CommandTOC
b out of order
7b_SGD_Cmnd_Hdg_narrowTOC
b out of order
7_Heading_ZPL_Command
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandLOP
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandTOC
8_ZPL_Function
8_ZPL_FunctionTOC
b Expected Result:
Styles should sort (and used to) as follows:
1_Heading1
1_Heading1TOC
1a_Heading1_NoTOC
1k_Title_Kit
2_Heading2
2_Heading2TOC
2a_Heading2_NoTOC
3_Heading3
4_Heading4
5_Heading_RunIn
6_Heading_Subtopic
7_Heading_ZPL_Command
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandLOP
7_Heading_ZPL_CommandTOC
7a_Heading_SGD_Command
7a_Heading_SGD_CommandTOC
7b_Heading_ZBI_CommandTOC
7b_SGD_Cmnd_Hdg_narrowTOC
8_ZPL_Function
8_ZPL_FunctionTOC

I have the same problem. I've lost track now of the number of times where I've assigned the wrong paragraph style to something since switching to FM8. The styles are no longer in the same order, so my level 1 heading is no longer the first tag that comes up when I press F9. Now I have to dig for it through other tags that start with the number 1 in our catalog.
Our paragraph tags were developed years ago, and it wasn't until FM8 that there was a problem with the sort order. The characters no longer sort the same as Windows sorts. An underscore is supposed to come before all letters and numbers. Adobe, please fix this annoying bug!!!
Donna Jones
Mikado, Michigan

Similar Messages

Sort order inconsistent behavior

There seems to be inconsistent behaviour when defining a default sort order sequence.
Everything works as expected when the display sequence and the order in which the columns are defined in the query are the same but as soon as the display sequence is changed the default sort order doesn't work for the second column in the order sequence.
I have put up an example at [apex.com|http://apex.oracle.com/pls/otn/f?p=36885:1]
In report EMP the display sequence and query sequence are the same and the default sort on "Job" and "Hiredate" is correct working. Even when the user sorts on "Manager".
The sort order sequence then becomes "Manager", "Job" and "Hiredate". As also descripted in the following Sorting on multiple columns
And exactly the behaviour we are looking for.
Report EMP2 is a copy of EMP with the only difference the order in which the columns are displayed
Now the default sort order doesn't work as expected. The report is first ordered on "Job" but then on "Employee" instate of "Hiredate" as is defined. Interestingly "Employee" is the second column in the query.
It seems that instate of the query_column_id the column_display_sequence is used in the order by. At least for the second column in the defined sort order sequence.
This may also explain the behaviour mentioned with [derived columns and sort sequence|http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=1006429&#1006429]
The display sequence in report EMP2 is where the wizard came up with.
Nicolette

Stew
At the report attributes you can define the sort sequence of a column. When you do that initialy the report is sorted as you defined it. So in my example that is first by "Job"and within "Job" by "Hiredate". When the user sort explicit on an other column this column is put before the columns you have defined.
So when the user clicks on "Manager" the sort order becomes "Manager", "Job", "Hiredate". When the user then sort on "Employee" the sort order becomes "Employee", "Job" an "Hiredate".
This works when the order in which the columns appear in your query are the same as the order in which they are displayed.
BUT as soon as the display order changes the sort sequence doesn't work anymore. Even worse is that also the initial sort sequence doesn't work for the second column any more. (I haven't tested for three or more columns)
In the example I have put on apex.com in the second report the sort sequence of the report attributes is the same as in the first report. But the initial sort order that is actually done is on "Job" and "Employee" instate of "Job" and "Hiredate". Where "Hiredate" is the second column in the display sequence. But "Employee" is the second column in the query.
So to really make use of the sort sequence you have to keep your display sequence equal to the order in witch they appear in the query. This isn't really practical.
Nicolette

Odd List Order in the Paragraph Catalog

I set up the paragraph catalog in FrameMaker 8, running on Windows XP. All listings were in alphabetical order, top-to-bottom. After logging on to the computer with a new user account and starting up FM, the paragraph catalog re-ordered itself into an odd mix of forward and backward alphabetical order.
Distinct letter ordering is still forward ("a" is listed above "b" which is in turn above "c"). This occurs for any combination of distinct letter groups ("bab" above "bcm" above "rlm" above "rxxx").
Reverse order occurs with repeat letter groups ("hhhh" above "hhh" above "hh" above "h") and with spaces ("bil" above "bi"). This reverse ordering is stopped by distinct letters (even though "bco" is above "bc", these both are above the following two: "blbn" and "blb". However, "blbn" is above "blb", which is reverse order again.)
This odd mix of reverse ordering inside forward ordering extends to keystroke recognition, which completely negates the use of keyboard shortcuts. When typing F9-h-h (to invoke the tag "hh H2" for Heading 2), the system proposes "hhhh" (tag "hhhh H4" for Heading 4) before tags with fewer h's ("hhh", "hh", and "h"). The system won't recognize the fewer letters.
After originally setting up the catalog, the odd reversing never took place and key recognition worked correctly. This brings up two questions:
1. How can this odd reversing be undone and complete top-to-bottom alphabetical order be restored?
2. Can users control the ordering of catalog listing to increase functionality by decoupling the keystroke mnemonic from the tag name (typically accomplished by entering the keystroke value in a separate field) and/or by decoupling the tag name from the catalog list position (manually move tags up or down the catalog regardless of tag name)?

Sheila,
Item 2: Would a test of saving it as an .mif file and then opening it in FM 8 be a constructive test?
Item 3: I switched to QWERTY, set it as the default keyboard, and restarted the machine.
Upon opening the FM file, the pg catalog was still in the odd order. I then renamed a tag (from "h H1" to "hhhh H1"). The tag moved up above the tag "hhhh H4" which is still the odd order: it should be above that tag since 1 comes before 4, but both of those tags should be below "hhh H3" and "hh H2". The two hhhh tags are above the hhh and hh tags.
I don't think this is the issue because I originally created the tag names with a Dvorak keyboard active and the catalog order was correct and F9 keystrokes worked properly. Until logging on as a new user.
I'll test whether logging on as the old user resets the list.
Patrick

Error: The sort order specified for distinct count records is incorrect

When processing a measure group with a distinct count measure in it, i get the following error:
"The sort order specified for distinct count records is incorrect."
I have no idea what this means - any ideas?

I had the same problem and your fix worked. In more detail, the problematic field was contract_no. I added a named calculation to the table in the Data Source View with the formula CHECKSUM(contract_no). Then I created the distinct count measure on that named calculation. And, lo and behold, the errors disappeared!
Thank you to Frank.
- CindyCindy P Hoskey

Thunar: incorrect sort order

Hello, everyone.
Guys, maybe any of you encountered with that problem in Thunar... especially if you use cyrillic letters in file or folder names.
I have the latest version of Thunar (1.4.0) installed, and it turns out it incorrectly sorts contents of folders.
I can not even understand the way Thunar sorts contents of any folder.
Here is the contents of one folder "sorted" by name (ascending).
Looking from top to bottom I see file names starting with...
cyrillic upper letters
digits
cyrillic lower letters
again digits
again cyrillic lower letters
english lower letters
and again cyrillic lower letters
Concrete example of another folder "sorted" by name:
голубь.txt
иволга.txt
аист.txt
орёл.txt
сова.txt
Absoluletly wrong order. The file with name that starts with 'A' is in the middle.
Cyrillic alpabet is:
Аа Бб Вв Гг Дд Ее Ёё Жж Зз Ии Йй Кк Лл Мм Нн Оо Пп Рр Сс Тт Уу Фф Хх Цц Чч Шш Щщ ЬЬ Ыы ЪЪ Ээ Юю Яя
Meanwhile
ls -1
gives right order
аист.txt
голубь.txt
иволга.txt
орёл.txt
сова.txt
PCManFM and other filemanagers give right sort order.
So, Thunar DOES NOT sort with 'ls'. Also, sort order of Thunar CAN NOT be changed using LC_COLLATE.
Thunar uses its own "mega-wise" algorithm.
P.S.
By the way, before version 1.4.0, everything was OK in Thunar. So one day their devs decided to make some "improvements".
Last edited by BrainWorker (2012-08-14 02:28:35)

BrainWorker wrote:
AaronBP wrote:They notice because they are in the CC list. Whenever a new comment comes in they get an email. You should not open a new bug if there's already one open about it.
I don't really care if they are going to complain about it or not. My goal is to make them pay attention to this bug, because I think it is nicely forgotten.
This is open source, bro. You can't make anybody do anything, but you might encourage some admin to ban you if you willfully break rules. If you can't break open the source and fix the problem yourself (which is surely the most speedy solution!), you're better off following community procedures and being as helpful as possible. Otherwise you'll just be excluded and ignored.

All Photos Album Incorrect Sort Order

When I view the album "All Photos" from iCloud.com my photos are sorted by date with the newest ones at the bottom. When I view "All Photos" within iOS or the OS X app, the sorting order isn't correct. Any ideas?
Thanks!

I think this is an embarrassing thought-fail on Apple's part.
After removing good ways of sharing photos from one library to another, people end up having to get older pictures, or pictures loaded into a laptop while traveling, back onto our main Photos libraries though copying (edited) files over the network and re-add them. This create systematic discrepancies in date added and date taken.
When "All Photos" Panoramas", "Videos" and otherwise handy views can only be viewed by date added they add to the feeling of having to keep your photos in an exposed disorder.
If you think of a photo, do you think about when/where you took it or when/to what library you added the photo?
People think of the first, and machines (and now apparently Apple) intuitively think of the second..
But maybe I'm too harsh, and I have missed something. Can anybody see a good reason for focusing on date added rather than date taken?

Incorrect sort order of rows in Purchase Order based on Sales Order

Hello Experts.
I have this problem on SAP B1 8.81 PL 04:
I create a Purchase Order based on a Sales Order with 10 item rows, ticking the purchase order box in the logistic tab.
The sort order of rows is different between PO and SO.
I need the same order of SO on PO.
Is there something I can do or it's a problem of this patch?
I saw the Sap Note nr. 824822 but it's related to SAP B1 version 2004 A...
Regards
Silvia Reggiani
Edited by: Silvia Reggiani on Oct 11, 2011 12:26 PM

Hi,
Are you able to reproduce the issue in the DEMO Database on the 8.81 PL04?
Also, have you checked the issue in the latest patch of the 8.81?
Kind Regards,
Jitin
SAP Business One Forum Team

Incorrect Sort Order - On Home Page - News and Announcements

On the Company sub-pages "News and Announcements" the sort order is correct. The most recently added News or Announcements is at the top of the list sorted by Publish Date.
However on the Home Page they are not.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
BG...

Hi,
There is Enhancement Request on this problem created on Metalink (Bug 5571606) for about a year. It is marked as "Very desirable feature" but no info about when this desireable feature will be available. I asked Portal consultant at Oracle Services and was told, it depends on how many and how big customers would request this feature on behalf of their valid Support Contract.
So the only way I think is to create Service Requests on Metalink asking for patch.
I did in September 2006, what about you dear colleagues?
Regards Jiri Rohlicek

FM 8.0.4 (Patch 277) Bug: Missorting in Paragraph Catalog

FM 8.0.4 (patch 273) on Win XP SP3.
In my paragraph catalog, I've created tags that look like
H *** HEADINGS ***
to visually deliineate the heading tags, which are named things like
H1 DocTitle
H2 Section
and so forth. Unfortunately, the space character and at least some of the nonalphanumeric characters now sort below the alphanumerics. For example, I now have the sort order
H1 DocTitle
H2 Section
H *** HEADINGS ***
instead of
H *** HEADINGS ***
H1 DocTitle
H2 Section
Sorted correctly using 8.0.2, patch 273. So, where does one report a small bug such as this?
Thank you kindly,
Elchanan

Here's a thread on the forum from earlier today:
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b65f60/5
also, there's been some discussion on the Framers List:
http://www.frameusers.com

How do I retain the default 3 column sort order in a standard report

I have a standard (not interactive) report of about 12 columns in which I set column 1 as the primary sort, column 2 as the second sort within that and column 3 as another sort within 1&2. I have also made other columns sortable by the user. However, once a sort is done by the user on one of the other columns, the default sort order never seems to come back, even if the application is closed. Is there something I need to set?

Standard report sort columns are stored persistently as user preferences. The <tt>apex_util.remove_sort_preferences</tt> method can be used to remove them, resetting reports to the default sort order. However this is not a precision instrument: it removes the user's sort preferences for all reports...
It is possible to remove the sort preference for individual reports using the <tt>apex_util.remove_preference</tt> method by reverse engineering the required sort preference name from the admin user preference report, but I wouldn't recommend it. I recently worked on an application where this had been done for one report, but we removed this "feature" as: (1) no one could remember why it had been done in the first place; (2) it was completely inconsistent with the behaviour of the other app reports; (3) the implementation was Byzantine (get non-obvious pref value and have page re-request itself with additional parameters) and lead to (4) poor page performance.
Unless users are jumping up and down demanding this I'd stick to the status quo...
(Please update your forum profile with a better handle than "user719232".)

Sort order for photos synched from Aperture

I have synched photos from Aperture to the Apple TV, but the sort order when shown on Apple TV is not the same as the sort order in Aperture. Does anyone have an idea about which metadata field in Aperture is being used by Apple TV to determine the sort?

Hi this is my first append to Apple support so things may go pear shaped...
I have the same problem as you describe and have discovered that the order appears to be consistent with the file NAME order (as seen in Finder) This is not the camera file name but the version name I gave it when I imported the file into Aperture. I then exported the album to the desktop and streamed it to Appletv. (iTunes #count/album is sometimes wrong)
Given a file list of say 40 files, the new (incorrect Appletv re-sorted) order follows a pattern based on the FIRST numeric decimal digit in the filename!
Example - I have a folder containing 40 consecutive images - the new order these images will be displayed by Appletv will be as follows
1 10[...]19 2 20[...]29 3 31[...]39 4 40 5 6 7 8 9
I've proved this by photographing 40 separate image files each one showing a number in the range of 1 to 40 as an individual image. These are in order by number (as appears in the image) & file number assigned by the camera, and also therefore by file date time. I imported them into Aperture and assigned them the Version name of 'Number' + sequence.
So, when I view image file #1 named 'Number 1 of 40' I see the number '1' and the EXIF tells me it was taken at 28/07/2007 13:33:16 BDT. Similarly when I view image file #40 named 'Number 40 of 40' I see the number '40' and the EXIF tells me it was taken at 28/07/2007 13:37:34 BDT.
I CAN CHANGE the order Appletv displays these by renaming them - eg change file name 'Number 10 of 40' to 'Number 41 of 40' makes it appear at the end. The sequence now becomes 1 11-19 etc 40 41. Nothing else appears to have changed.
I've since found that a separate burn of different files(29) using Toast followed the same pattern.
Since starting this append iTunes has the added the album of 40 numbers to its list and I have just viewed them on Atv slideshow. Bizarrely the order is different again - 3,5,2,4,1,10,13,15,6,11,14,7,8,12,9,32,17,33,26,22,23,28,18,29,20,24,35,16,21,3 1,19,25,30,34,27,37,38,40,39,36. Random is off. Please can we have a fix for this or at least a workaround.
Thanks.

Sort order for Simplified Chinese (pinyin)

FrameMaker 10 (Windows)
It seems that if I specify the sort order for Simplified Chinese (pinyin) on the reference page,
index entries that start with "i" and "v" are not shown under their corresponding group titles.
(I assume that this may be due to the fact that pinyin words never start with these letters.)
If I have an entry that starts with an English word like "IP," it appears under the "J" group.
I want the entry to appear under the "I" group. How can I do this?
I have the IX reference page set up as follows:
GroupTitlesIX paragraph
Symbols[\];Numerics[0];A;B;C;D;E;F;G;H;I;J;K;L;M;N;O;P;Q;R;S;T;U;V;W;X;Y;Z;
SortOrderIX paragraph
<$symbols><$numerics><$alphabetics><$pinyin>
I've also tried:
SortOrderIX paragraph
<$symbols><$numerics><$pinyin>
Thanks in advance.
Tak Osato

I sort of found a workaround, but it may lead to other problems, so use it at your own risk.
It also requires a bit of work.
The idea is to use the sort order for Japanese by specifying the following in the IX reference page.
Symbols[\ ];数字[0];A;B;C;D;E;F;G;H;I;J;K;L;M;N;O;P;Q;R;S;T;U;V;W;X;Y;Z;あ;い;う;え;お;か;き;く;け;こ;さ;し;す;せ;そ ;た;ち;つ;て;と;な;に;ぬ;ね;の;は;ひ;ふ;へ;ほ;ま;み;む;め;も;や;ゆ;よ;ら;り;る;れ;ろ;わ;ん;[　]
<$symbols><$numerics><$alphabetics><$kana>
Then, you need to capitalize the first letter in the bracket used for sorting for every index entry.
Example:
Instead of
画面[hua4mian4]
specify
画面[Hua4mian4]
Now, I'm wondering if there is a way to do a search and replace on all index entries to capitalize the first letter...

Sort order column with a between filter

Hi all,
[using OBI-EE version 10.1.3.3.1]
I've got a column 'BLOCK_ROW' which contains values A,B,C....AA,AB,AC...BA,BB...FK,FL
Alphabetically this orders A,AA,AB.... which is incorrect. The order should be A,B,C...
To be able to sort correctly we added a column 'ROW_SORT' to our model, which is numeric. This column is set as the 'sort order column' in the repository and makes sure the sorting is done correctly.
So far, so good...
Now, I want to be able to use a 'between' filter on this column, e.g. between 'A' and 'C'. Unfortunately this returns A,B,C,AA,AB... while I want it to return A,B,C.
Is this possible?
Thanks,
Elio
Generated SQL:
select distinct T91353.BLOCK_ROW as c1,
T91353.ROW_SORT as c2
from
<table_name> T91353
where ( T91353.BLOCK_ROW between 'A' and 'C' )
order by c2
--> Sorting handled based on ROW_SORT, between filter not :(

That will only do the trick in this particular example. Between 'A' and 'AA' will fail again and only returns A and AA while it should return A..Z and AA.
Using extra filters is always possible but I'm looking for a more robust solution, which also allows for dashboard 'between' prompts based on this column.
A workaround I came up with is to add a calculated field which concats an '_' in front of the single 'digit' values. This results in: A,B,_C,.....,AA,AB....FL. This set can be ordered alphabetically and this will work for now.
In the future, however, it might happen that the order of the letters will completely change. In the datamodel this can be achieved by changing the order of the numbers in ROW_SORT.
Example dataset:
BLOCK_ROW | ROW_SORT
Q | 1
D | 2
F | 3
AA | 4
A | 5
The filter 'between D and AA' should then result in D,F,AA.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Elio

Sort Order in a Legend

Good Day to All,
I have a couple of chart in a Report. I'm a little confused how to correct a order how the data is represented in a legend.
In some of the charts the legend is correct
2012
2013
2014
but on some charts the legend is incorrect
2013
2014
2012
another example is
on some charts the legend is correct
Qtr 1
Qtr 2
Qtr 3
Qtr 4
on other charts the legend is incorrect
Qtr 3
Qtr 4
Qtr 1
Qtr 2
Is there a property where I can control the order of the legend.
Crystal Reports XI 11.5.0.313
Regards,
David Martinez

Good Abhilash,
Thanks again you always come through. Who ever created these charts did them as a group template so if I change the sort it may correct the one but upset another. Is there a way to change one chart a time without changing the group template? When I click chart expert there is a option. Applied to group template or Applied to this instance. If I choose applied to this instance the Data tab is not present, therefore I can't change the sort order. Any thought suggestions?

Sort order of Imessages and SMS

In previous IOS versions, when you deleted a Imessage or an SMS, the sort order of message automatically changed to last date. In IOS 8.1 the sort order
doesn´t do this, which means that if you delete a message send today and the one before that was sent yesterday, the message is not moved "down" my list and counted as from yesterday it still stays as if it was sent today.
Could you please fix this.
Thx (Apple 6 User)

The issue isn't really the T in The Beach Boys. The issue is the inconsistency between the sort in Finder, the playlist sort in the side bar, and the sort within Music.
1) If you make a smart playlist The Beach Boys, it will be sorted in the side bar under T, not under B.
2) If you make a smart playlist 409 (containing The Beach Boys' song 409), it will be sorted at the top before the letter A. In Music, it will be at the bottom, after the letter Z.
While this behavior may be of long standing, it is still inconsistent. I think we should be given an option as to how we want to sort numbers and punctuation marks. I assume that the american english sort order is not imposed on other language versions of iTunes. It shouldn't be difficult to allow the sort to match the locale of the computer, so that iTunes sorts match Finder sorts.
P.S. Most of my files are wave files from old records and tapes. I chose to name The Beach Boys The Beach Boys and The Beatles Beatles, i.e., I chose to put one under T and one under B. Only The Band, The Beach Boys, The Who, and The Soul Stirrers were worthy of the extra The, to be sorted under the T's where I wanted them to be (sorry Beatles).

Sort order in Paragraph Catalog inconsistent / incorrect

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for