Bug 157971

Description:
Yes, I do know the difference between alpha sorting and numeric sorting but surely the result should be what a human requires, not what some 200-year-old IEEE specification demands.

Attached is a simple file with four index columns.

Index 1 is what probably everybody on the planet understands when translated into their own numbering system.

Index 2 is produced by filling it down and again is what everybody would expect.

Index 3 is also produced by filling down but with an intentional change from lower to upper case at the first numerical increment.

Index 4 adds another "phase" to the number for good measure.

Understand that the fill-down function correctly interprets the requirement as it successfully produced the results indicated.

Sorting Ascending  A-Z on indices 1 & 2 has no impact - although they may both be used to return the corrupted list to an acceptable condition following "sorting" Ascending A-Z on the other two.

It would be nice to be able to say the same about Indices 3 & 4.

Would it not be worth doing it right instead of copying everybody else's mistakes?

I'm uncertain whether the big boys would consider this to be related in some way to Bug50786

Steps to Reproduce:
Play with the filter buttons B1:E1 on the attached sheet

Actual Results:
Unacceptable sort

Expected Results:
Acceptable sort


Reproducible: Always


User Profile Reset: No

Additional Info:
Version: 7.5.7.1 (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community
Build ID: 47eb0cf7efbacdee9b19ae25d6752381ede23126
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19045; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win
Locale: sv-SE (en_GB); UI: en-GB
Calc: threaded

I will understand if it's defined as an enhancement rather than a bug