Layout not in alphabetical order
Any idea why this saved layout is not in alphabetical order? It does not show up anywhere else in the Saved Layouts?
mm.
Comments
-
Milkman said:
Any idea why this saved layout is not in alphabetical order? It does not show up anywhere else in the Saved Layouts?
It is in alphabetical order. It is normal to ignore "A", "An", "The" etc when sorting titles; this is how it works in the Library as well.
0 -
I wondered this before too. Thanks for the answer Yasmin.
0 -
Well, that's something I didn't know.
Thanks.
Yasmin Stephen said:Milkman said:Any idea why this saved layout is not in alphabetical order? It does not show up anywhere else in the Saved Layouts?
It is in alphabetical order. It is normal to ignore "A", "An", "The" etc when sorting titles; this is how it works in the Library as well.
0 -
Yasmin Stephen said:
It is in alphabetical order. It is normal to ignore "A", "An", "The" etc when sorting titles; this is how it works in the Library as well.
It's also how I was taught to alphabetize in the 1950's
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Milkman said:
Well, that's something I didn't know.
This is included in many standards such as APA Style:
https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/alphabetize-nonsignificant-words
Many Libraries also use this style of alphabetizing. It sometimes requires human intervention to sort properly and might seem inconsistent to some, so there is some pushback against this convention, but it has a strong tradition and strong support, so it'll probably be with us for a long time. I for one appreciate it. It's easier to see and look up a title based on the first important word in it. I dislike lists that have a huge section of titles beginning with "A" or "The". I'd rather see those titles grouped with other titles that begin with the word that is the second word in those A or The titles, since they are probably more like each other.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:Milkman said:
Well, that's something I didn't know.
This is included in many standards such as APA Style:
https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/alphabetize-nonsignificant-words
Many Libraries also use this style of alphabetizing. It sometimes requires human intervention to sort properly and might seem inconsistent to some, so there is some pushback against this convention, but it has a strong tradition and strong support, so it'll probably be with us for a long time. I for one appreciate it. It's easier to see and look up a title based on the first important word in it. I dislike lists that have a huge section of titles beginning with "A" or "The". I'd rather see those titles grouped with other titles that begin with the word that is the second word in those A or The titles, since they are probably more like each other.
Well, that makes sense. I too don't like sifting through all the A or The titles. Just thought I'd ask.
0
