Come together with the global Drupal community in Rotterdam, 28 Sept – 1 Oct 2026. Sessions, contribution, connection, and Early Bird savings until 8 June.Hi, I'm using the very latest 6.x-3.2-beta5, just downloaded today. As far as I can tell, if I get everything set up just so by dragging items around, then another user uses filters, it changes the sort order for everyone. I've tried this several times:
Administrator changes sort order then saves. I confirm using another user that the desired sort order is in effect. The user fiddles with filter settings then hits "apply" to see a filtered view. All the order values have now been changed.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Picture 6.jpg | 68.1 KB | EllenM1-1 |
| #1 | Picture 7.jpg | 69.1 KB | EllenM1-1 |
Comments
Comment #1
EllenM1-1 commentedI've attached two pictures. Picture 6 shows the order values before the user filters the view. Picture 7 shows the order values after the user filters the views. I think changing the filters should not change the order values.
Comment #2
sevi commentedYes, you're right. That's just the way it works. I also thought about this effect a long time.
I ended up with:
Filters should only be used if nodes don't appear more than once in different filter states. In this case you actually use filters to split the view in many logical derived views.
If you want to filter the content without any restrictions you may not use DraggableViews for this display.
I'll mention this in documentation.
How do you think about this point of view?
Comment #3
EllenM1-1 commentedI'm not sure I completely understand, but let me see...
How about this: the Order value is set by people who have the permission to set it. The sorting OF those values is set by anyone with access to the filters, and is displayed only to that person who set it. Other people start off with the default sort.
So let's say I have
item 1 - order value 1 - category A
item 2 - order value 2 - category A & B
item 3 - order value 3 - category B
item 4 - order value 4 - category B
item 5 - order value 5 - category A
item 6 - order value 6 - category A
The default sort is on the order fields, ascending.
I'm a user, I come along and filter by category so I see only category A.
I see:
item 1 - order value 1 - category A
item 2 - order value 2 - category A (& B)
item 5 - order value 5 - category A
item 6 - order value 6 - category A
I can sort that list any way I want, by order field, or if allowed, by clicking columns to sort by other columns, and it will NOT affect the order value. Thus it will not affect any other users.
Then if another users filters by category B they get:
item 2 - order value 2 - category (A &) B
item 3 - order value 3 - category B
item 4 - order value 4 - category B
and they in turn can sort however they want.
I'm probably not understanding something crucial, but I think my way might work. Otherwise, please add in a second order field that WOULD remain constant and act like what I am suggesting.
This is a great module, I really appreciate it. Thank you!
Comment #4
mitchell commenteddocumentation, right?
Comment #5
EllenM1-1 commentedNo, I don't think documentation will do it - at least for me.
Comment #6
EllenM1-1 commentedI resolved it by switching to the node-order module.
Comment #7
sevi commentedI still don't know what you want to be improved.
Saving an unique order for each kind of filtering..simply doesn't make sense.
If you change the view (and this is the case when you use filters) then you change the order values of the nodes.
Comment #8
sevi commentedComment #9
aren cambre commentedWhat if the Save Order handler affects all nodes of the unfiltered view? Would probably increase algorithmic complexity, though, and not sure if it can be done in a way that doesn't confuse users.
An alternative may be to allow huge increments in the order, such as 1000, 2000, 3000, etc. Then if using a filtered view, drop down by a power of ten, although that solution would break down if there are more than 100 items in a filtered view.
Comment #10
istryker commented6.x in now unsupported. Closing this issue.