Why are the citations in the reading list not sorted as expected?

If list is not sorted as expected, it means that the citations at the beginning of the list are missing the sorted information.

Example: If the sorting by 'Title' doesn't work, when opening the 'Citation Details' tab, you'll see that the 'Title' field is empty, though the resource record has a title.

How citations with missing data are created?

Currently, the citations are not designed to reflect changes in the resource metadata. So, if the citation was created when the resource had no call number, the citation will remain without the call number even after the resource record will be updated. 

Possible Solutions:

A. Replace the defective citations:

1. Remove the citation from the list
2. Add a new one instead.
3. New citations will derive all needed information from the resource record's metadata. 
4. With the fixed citations, the list will be sorted as expected.

B. Sort by a different parameter

Example: If some of the citations have an empty call numbers, the sorting by call number won't work. Consider to sort the list by a different parameter (title, author etc.).

Note:

Before duplicating old reading lists, check that the list is sorted. If not, fix the defective citations in the list before duplicating it.

Alternatively, consider to create a new reading list from scratch.

• Article last edited: 31-May-2016