What is the sort order for the Marks section and marks in mintage lines? [solved]

Related to a recent forum discussion, what is the sort order for Marks?

In a Gibraltar Penny listing the die marks (in the Marks section and mintage lines) are ordered AA, AF, AE, AD, AC, AB, BB. But in an Isle of Man Penny listing the order is the expected AA, AB, AC, AD, AE.

I hope that the die letters can be sorted alphabetically in all listings.

This is quite old topic but I see that nothing changed from the Nov 2022.

I don't know exact rules for Pobjoy die marks sorting but I guess these die marks are added not as text but as a object (picture) that cannot be sorted. In consequence, it seems that sorting is done by another one column, so year is primarly sorting, than data are sorted by comment (first yearlines without comment, then the ones with comments), then if no comments (or similar comment for more lines) sorting is done by die mark, probably based on the order of when the die mark was added to the database /added to the page (????).

For two examples above, there is no comments for Gibraltar and similar comments (Schon number) for IOM, so sorting is done by years and then by die marks only… Gibraltar is strnage: 1989 looks ok, 1988 is AA first and than descrnding from AF to AB which Has no sense.

Maybe admins are able to attribute the text value for the die mark pictures (change the picture file name or something like this?) to have it sorted in right order?

It's not a must have, but it looks better sorted alphabetically by die mark, especially if we have 4-7 version for each year and we have multiple years at once, so quite long list of varietes.

I found the same problem when adding the mintmark and other marks to the year lines in N#7733

According Xavier https://en.numista.com/forum/topic126255.html#p1024317 the mintmarks are sorted alphabetically. The order is not based on the name of the mint associated to the letter.

The order is not as expected when the mintmark is a symbol. The year lines in my example have this order:

1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 10 - *1874
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 11 - *1818
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 12 - *1875
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 5 - *1871
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 6 - *1818
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 7 - *7118
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 8 - *7171
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 9 - *1873

It appears to be sorted by the Cal# reference (but alphabetically, not numerically).

The expected order is year, mintmark, other marks, letters, reference and, maybe, comment:

1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 9 - *1873

1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 10 - *1874
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 11 - *1818
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 12 - *1875
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 5 - *1871
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 6 - *1818
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 7 - *7118
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 8 - *7171

(numerical order in the reference)

or at least:

1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 10 - *1874
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 11 - *1818
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 12 - *1875
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 9 - *1873

1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 5 - *1871
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 6 - *1818
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 7 - *7118
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 8 - *7171

(alphabetical order in the reference)

Other case: N#17552

The year lines have this order:

1878 🟌 D E M - Cal# 10 - *1962
1878 🟌 D E M - Cal# 22 - *1878
1878 🟌 E M M - Cal# 23 - *1878
1878 🟌 D E M - Cal# 9 - *1961
1879 🟌 E M M - Cal# 24 - *1879

The expected order is:

1878 🟌 D E M - Cal# 9 - *1961
1878 🟌 D E M - Cal# 10 - *1962
1878 🟌 D E M - Cal# 22 - *1878
1878 🟌 E M M - Cal# 23 - *1878
1879 🟌 E M M - Cal# 24 - *1879
 

I mention to referees of Spain @zegeri and @oynbcn so they are aware of this topic/suggestion.

Hello,

We now consider the marks when sorting year lines.

Thanks!

My second example https://en.numista.com/forum/topic126306.html#p1235763 is sorted correctly but my first example https://en.numista.com/forum/topic126306.html#p1235579 still has problems. Now, the order is

1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 5 - *1871 ❌

1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 9 - *1873

1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 10 - *1874
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 11 - *1818
1871 🟌 D E M - Cal# 12 - *1875
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 7 - *7118
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 8 - *7171
1871 🟌 S D M - Cal# 6 - *1818

Thank you! That will make using Isle of Man coin listings easier.

(I looked at several pages and everything was as expected.)

It should be fine for all examples now 🙂

Thanks! Very helpfull for a lot of pages with multiple die marks varietes.

Xavier

It should be fine for all examples now 🙂

Yes.

Great improvement for Numista. Thank you very much for this implementation. It will be very useful for all coins to be sorted correctly by their assayer and die marks. Thanks!!!