When I change an order/family/genus/species node name in the thing editor, the default is to place the new entry after the last entry at that level within the same next higher node, e.g. a new order defaults to being sequenced after Passeriformes

Could the default be to place it immediately after the name being replaced?  That way when it rebuilds the tree the changed node would be positioned at the same point in the tree, and I would not have to spend time repositioning.

Hi Steve,

Ok - spent considerable time looking at this problem and the code. What you are asking for presents problems, unfortunately, at several levels. This tax editor was designed with the concept of building a new taxonomic list in linear order (sorting after the last thing entered) or editing small amounts of things in an existing tax list.

The very quick solution is this. For example, let's say I was going to change thing 'blue grouse fuliginosus' from Order Galliformes to Otidiformes. Just an example. I type 'Oti' into the Order field and the family through species stays constant. The sort order, as you have stated, does change to Passeriformes. However, since the Sort Order is a SmartSearch field, I just TAB down (5 Tabs) and type in 'Ga'; it is reset to Galliformes and I press Enter. The changed thing sorts right after Galliformes on the rebuild of the tree. My thinking here is that you are using the mouse to open the dropdown, find Galliformes and select it. Very time consuming when editing many things. But, tab-tab-tab-tab-'ga' is much quicker and your hands don't have to leave the keyboard to find the mouse.

Does this help?

Well, I guess that is why it is called a Wishlist.

What you say is true, and it works. The issue is that there are an increased number of these changes as additional DNA data comes to the light, more allignment happens,and things like gender changes to species and ssp names occur. The amount of data change that I make is not small. However, the real problem is that I forget to do it, get mad at myself, remember for the next three times, forget to do it, get mad at myself, and go into a spin cycle.

I think my suggestion would work when sequentially building a list, since placing a new entry at the end is very like placing it after the last entry you were working on, which in a sequential build would be at the end.

If it is not going to happen, I can cope with that, but you do not know until you ask.