dlorde
Is it possible to order child thoughts by the child name alone, i.e. ignoring parent names that use the comma trick?

I have parent thoughts with many children, some of which use the comma trick to include the parent name(s) and/or grandparent name(s), either before or after the child name, depending on readability, inheritance precedence, preference, etc.

When the children are displayed under a particular parent, the ordering uses the full thought name, including comma'd parents & grandparents, in the order they appear in the name - which means that child thoughts starting with the same letter do not necessarily appear next to each other.

For example, if I have a parent 'Science' and children 'Science, Blogs', 'Unusual, Science', 'Physics', 'Biology', 'Popular, Science', 'Science, Videos'

    What I'd like to see under 'Science':                        What I get:

                        Biology                                               Biology    
                        Blogs                                                  Physics  
                        Physics                                               Popular  
                        Popular                                               Blogs         (Science, Blogs)
                        Unusual                                              Videos        (Science, Videos)
                        Videos                                                Unusual

Equally, if some of those children have other parents, their order of appearance under each parent will depend on the presence or absence of the parents in the child name, and the ordering of the parent(s) names in the child name.

I am aware of the trick of adding numbers or letters to the start of the child to fix
ordering, but if there are many children and you add a new one, you have to edit all, or most, of the children to retain correct ordering, and this doesn't work where children have more than one parent.
Quote
zenrain
You can always change the comma to the end of the name rather than the beginning. F.ex "Blogs, Science" and "Videos, Science".
macOS 10.13
TheBrain 9.0.248
Quote
dlorde
zenrain wrote:
You can always change the comma to the end of the name rather than the beginning. F.ex "Blogs, Science" and "Videos, Science".
Yes, I realise that, but my point is that since TheBrain lets me arrange the parent/child name ordering according to my naming preference in each case, it should then sensibly order children by child name alone.

When you're viewing the children of a parent, there's no point including the parent name in the sort. Is it difficult to sort on child name alone, or is there some other situation I'm not taking into account?

If sensible child sort ordering requires the child name to appear first in the thought name, then it seems sensible that TheBrain should require that the child name is always first - but that seems overly restrictive, if it's possible to have the best of both worlds.

When I was developing GUIs, we always tried to ensure that all user choices gave reasonable/sensible results. 

It's not a serious usability issue, but it seems really odd to sort children this way.
Quote
mcaton
Have you experimented with the hidden naming feature? You could name your Thoughts:

.01 Science, Biology
.02 Science, Blogs
.03 Science, Physics
.04 Popular, Science
.05 Unusual, Science
.06 Science, Videos   

By adding the period before the number, this would hide the number from view in TheBrain plex and keep things in order when appearing together. 

For added 'buffer' and possibility of more Thoughts being added in this category at a later date, you could name them .100, .200, .300 etc.  Then, for example, if you add "Chemical, Experiments" at a later date AND you prefer for this to go after your Physics Thought - you would name the Thought ".350 Chemical, Experiments"  This way you don't have to rename everything after a certain digit.

Matt


Quote
dlorde
Thanks for the suggestion Matt, but I think this numbering workaround is an ugly kludge, and fails for children with more than one parent, as they'll only appear correctly sorted for one parent.

I really don't see the problem with child-name-only sorting; is it a technical difficulty?
Quote
mrsandbags
The numbering trick really doesn't get the job done unless your use case is simple.

It's fine if a thought is only going to be a child of one other thought. As soon as you want it to be a child of another thought (with potentially a different ordering of those siblings) you're stuck.

This has caught me out when I've had exactly this situation, hence why I asked for a separate index field for each thought (in the context of a parent).

Matt
MOWER/VALDEMARIN
Experts at creating value by sharpening purpose, stimulating thinking, sharing insight, and finding hidden opportunities for you
tel +44 797 707 6709  ·  skype: matt.mower ·   http://mwrvld.com/  ·  https://uk.linkedin.com/in/mattmower

TheBrain v9.0.245.0 | macOS 10.12.6 | MacBook Pro 13,1 (late 2016) 2.4Gz i7, 16GB RAM, Intel Iris 540 GPU


Quote
dlorde
mrsandbags wrote: This has caught me out when I've had exactly this situation, hence why I asked for a separate index field for each thought (in the context of a parent).
Wouldn't ordering by child name alone fix that?
Quote
mrsandbags
dlorde wrote:
Wouldn't ordering by child name alone fix that?


Would it? I'm not sure.

As I understand it there are three possible situations in this context:
  1. I want to order by name
  2. I want to order by an arbitrary index (visible) -> use a numeric prefix
  3. I want to order by an arbitrary index (invisible) -> use a dotted numeric prefix
so two problems would be:
  • If I want (1) and (2) I can't have them because the index becomes part of the name.
  • If I want the same thought ordered #1 in one parent, and #3 in another parent I can't have that either

But perhaps I have missed something.

In any case these kind of naming hacks are all well and good as a stop-gap measure to get things done. But this feels like a hack that has been left to fester. Maybe it's an 80% solution, but it's not working well for me so far.
MOWER/VALDEMARIN
Experts at creating value by sharpening purpose, stimulating thinking, sharing insight, and finding hidden opportunities for you
tel +44 797 707 6709  ·  skype: matt.mower ·   http://mwrvld.com/  ·  https://uk.linkedin.com/in/mattmower

TheBrain v9.0.245.0 | macOS 10.12.6 | MacBook Pro 13,1 (late 2016) 2.4Gz i7, 16GB RAM, Intel Iris 540 GPU


Quote
dlorde
mrsandbags wrote:

Would it? I'm not sure.

As I understand it there are three possible situations in this context:
  1. I want to order by name
  2. I want to order by an arbitrary index (visible) -> use a numeric prefix
  3. I want to order by an arbitrary index (invisible) -> use a dotted numeric prefix
so two problems would be:
  • If I want (1) and (2) I can't have them because the index becomes part of the name.
  • If I want the same thought ordered #1 in one parent, and #3 in another parent I can't have that either

But perhaps I have missed something.

In any case these kind of naming hacks are all well and good as a stop-gap measure to get things done. But this feels like a hack that has been left to fester. Maybe it's an 80% solution, but it's not working well for me so far.

Ah, yes; my mistake - I hadn't realised you wanted an arbitrary index per parent.

The only simple way of doing this that I can think of is to allow hidden name prefixes for the parent entry in the child name, so a child thought that should be indexed first under Parent One and third under Parent Two, might have a name constructed something like this:

[ Parent One .001, Parent Two .003, Child Name ]

But it all seems a bit clumsy.
Quote

Add a Website Forum to your website.

Newsletter Signup  Newsletter        Visit TheBrain Blog   Blog       Follow us on Twitter   Twitter       Like Us on Facebook   Facebook         Circle Us on Google+  Google         Watch Us on Youtube  YouTube       

TheBrain Mind Map & Mindmapping Software     Download TheBrain Mind Mapping Software