As mentioned in Calendar / Daily Notes View I keep a list in reverse chronological order with new items added to the top and an iOS shortcut that adds a new today’s date heading at midnight to separate the days. Every now and then I’d like to look at this list in chronological order (scrolling down to the future) like the Due list. I could do a time created/updated sort, but quite often I’ll add things I forgot on previous days, so the creation/updated times aren’t strictly in reverse chronological order. Is there any way to reverse sort the order of a list, one level only, based purely on item position?
Hello,
Sorry, I’m a bit confused. Our sort dialog allows to sort either one level or all levels, and it allows to do reverse sorting by time created/updated.
What the extra sorting option you’re asking for?
Regards,
KIR
The list in question is in mostly reverse chronological order as I usually add new items from the top. Sometimes I forget something and add an item somewhere in the middle of the list, so visually it’s in reverse chronological order, but because of the new item’s creation date being more recent than the surrounding items where it was inserted I can’t just do a chronological order sort and keep that new item in its intended place. That’s the best I can explain it. So, I’d like to do reverse sort a list of items, top level only, based purely on their list positions, not creation date or modification date. Any way to do that? Thanks.
Perhaps “sort” is misleading here, as this operation isn’t the reverse of any available sorting criteria. Rather, it’s a reversal of the current item positions within the list. (If I got this right.)
OK, now I think I get it, thanks. I don’t see a way to reverse a list of items on a level, we don’t have a command for this. Probably this could be a separate command/action, like “Reverse list items order”, as it indeed is not about sorting but about reordering.
I move this to features/ideas category, hope to squeeze it into one of the next updates.
Thanks!
Reordering is more accurate. Thanks!