Jump to content

Numerical Name Note Sorting Behavior Changed in Recent Versions


Go to solution Solved by AlbertR,

Recommended Posts

Version: 10.100.3 on Windows 11
 

Issue:

  1. I have 20 Notes in a notebook. Each note name starts with 1,2,3,...,20. For example: 1 ABC, 2 PQR,...,20 XYZ etc.
  2. Previous correct sort order by Name: 1 ABC, 2 PQR, 3 JKL, etc.
  3. Now incorrect sort order by Name: 1 ABC, 10 EFG, 11 MNO, etc.

TLDR: Sort by Name should be 1,2,3,... and not 1, 10, 11,...2, 20, 3....

 

 

 

Untitled - Copy.png

Edited by Dhruv Solanki
Edited: Screenshot
  • Like 1
Link to comment

This is hardly just an EN issue. Expecting any app to order things 1, 2, 3,..., 10, 11 relies on the app knowing they are numbers - in this case they are being treated as text as titles are clearly text. The fail safe method is always to use 01 rather than just 1. This is a rule that has saved me so many times in so many different apps!

Remember, differences in the behaviour of the web app might just be different version numbers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
  • Level 5*

Easier and more reliable to preface note titles with ISO dates - yymmdd - or use leading zeros - 001, 002 etc.  (I use a text expander to generate date and time from a keystroke)

If Evernote add a number field to titles it'll just complicate and slow down note creation.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, gazumped said:

Easier and more reliable to preface note titles with ISO dates - yymmdd - or use leading zeros - 001, 002 etc.  (I use a text expander to generate date and time from a keystroke)

If Evernote add a number field to titles it'll just complicate and slow down note creation.

I relied on using _ (underscore) at the beginning of folder for forcing some folders to appear FIRST in a specific notebooks, before numbers

recent change to EN sorting forced me to change naming scheme as _ (underscore) no longer appears as first char sorted

does it impact a lot? not, it is just irritating for note system that worked for over decade

  • Like 2
Link to comment

TBH for me this sounds like they ast least once fixed an annoying and quite common issue with indeterministic sorting, because "1 ABC, 10 EFG, 11 MNO" is the correct version.

Link to comment
  • Level 5*
2 hours ago, goratnik said:

this sounds like they ast least once fixed an annoying and quite common issue with indeterministic sorting

...And then they rewrote the process in a different code base...

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...