Fix Numeric Sorting

[ben]

Most people think of sorting numerically as 1, 2, 3, 4...10, 11, 12, etc.

Not Revit, it sorts numerically as 1, 11, 12, 13...19, 2, 20, 21, 22...3, 30, 31, 32

Which throws numbers way out of wack if you are have things numbered with different amounts of digits (1, 10, 100, 1000, etc)

Can this be fixed to it sorts numerically just like how everyone else in the world sorts numerically?

This is also annoying when sorting by pipe sizes (and I assume duct, conduit, wall, etc sizes as well)

Microsoft Office software has had numeric sorting figured out for as long as I have been alive, but Revit can't?

[peter_vanorshoven]

Any solution for this item should immediately also help us with MINUS. As architects, we deals with basements (sometimes up to minus 4) so sorting and ordering should place minus four at the bottom, ground floor zero somewhere in the middle and level 42 at the top...

[Thommy_]

and pls if you change something at the sorting sytem, pls have look at our german special characters Ä, Ö and Ü. They are always at the end of the list, but they should be next to A, O and U. Thank you!

[TheRealChrisHildebran]

Are you talking about text parameters (Shared or Project) not sorting as a number parameter would?

[anielson]

In general it could be way more customized. 

Example: just pick the digit that you want to be the counter, and be able to add a suffix or prefix or something in between. And pick how many digits it counts to before the next level up counts up one. And have the option to include zero or not. 

Say you have pipes that are sorted first by diameter and then by thickness. So level 1 is Diameter and level 2 is thickness, and you say to sort first by the first three digits, then add a dash, and then sort by the last two digits. And have it count by 0.5, and the max is 8.

500 mm pipe with 6.5mm thick walls: 55-3.5

I don't work with pipe so that's probably a bad example. But a dialogue box with these kind of options would be nice. (Like Word has)

[ChrisHildebranAtWork]

Regarding Ben's original post, if the data type of parameter that is not sorting is a 'Text' type, then sorting will look as Ben noted: "1, 11, 12, 13...19, 2, 20, 21, 22...3, 30, 31, 32". I'm confident that if the data type is an 'Integer' or 'Number' type, the sorting would be correct.