RE: sorting order

["Craig Johnson" <CJOHNSON@xxxxxxxxxx>]

A "Newest first" re-sort is also one that doesn't place see references
at the end, it puts them at the beginning. After sorting your example by
"Newest first," a link to an actual bibliographic record doesn't come
until you get to page four! Not sure how many people would get that far
without giving up. I don't know that there's anything to be done about
it, but it can be extremely confusing to users and may end up
discouraging them from using a very useful tool.

Craig Johnson
Iowa City Public Library
cjohnson@xxxxxxxxxx 

>>> DJones@xxxxxxxxxx 09/19/03 06:42PM >>>
Of course, with R2003 Phase 3, it's really easy for the patron to
change the sort to whatever they want once they reach the browse
screens! 

Although one funky thing happens if you sort a browse or index browse
screen by anything other than "system sorted" or "call number" - the
"see" references all get sorted at the end of the list...

http://sculib.scu.edu/search/tbible+o+t/tbible+o+t/1,561,561,E/2browse/indexsort=a


Check out the last 4 pages of results. Weird. It makes sense (nulls
are
often sorted last), but it's still weird. 

HTH,
David
____________________________________________________________________
David Jones                                     mailto:djones@xxxxxxxxxx 
Library Systems Manager                   http://www.scu.edu/library/ 
Orradre Library                                   fax:   408-551-1805
Santa Clara University                            phone: 408-551-7167
500 El Camino Real
Santa Clara CA 95053-0500
_____________________________________________________________________
"Music is the hot sauce on the burrrrito of life"
--Rikochet, Mucha Lucha http://www2.warnerbros.com/lucha/home.html