Periodicals with numbers not sorting in numerical order

[clmahoney]

Describe the bug
If the periodical has numbers but no volumes, the numbers are not saved in numerical order.

To reproduce
See 4585, "New Writing," which does not have vols but has numbers:

Expected behavior
Numbers should be listed in numerical order. A secondary sort field would help resolve this.

[clmahoney]

Nevermind I think I just did something wrong! This is working now!

[rlskoeser]

@clmahoney I'm not sure what you figured out, it would be good to document if you can. Based on the information in the database I don't think the sort you want is guaranteed. In this case, couldn't you use dates to indicate the proper sorting? We only display year, but the field allows year/month or year/month/day.

[clmahoney]

@rlskoeser I see. I couldn't use dates because this was a seasonal magazine, so the year was the same but it was divided into Spring/Autumn spreads.

[clmahoney]

@rlskoeser For some reason when I deleted the seasons that were out of order and added them back in, they were in the right order! (Again, same year, just different seasons)

[rlskoeser]

@clmahoney what I was trying to say is that you can add approximate months corresponding to the seasons in the date — they will be used for sorting but only the year will be displayed.