starred/audiobookshelf
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/advplyr/audiobookshelf.git synced 2026-05-30 23:40:40 +02:00
Code Issues 1.0k Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

[Enhancement]: Support multiple series ordering (ie. Publication Order + Chronoligical Order) #2441

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-04-25 00:07:10 +02:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:10 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Originally created by @teotikalki on GitHub (Dec 27, 2024).

Type of Enhancement

Web Interface/Frontend

Describe the Feature/Enhancement

There are a lot of series which expand over time to include books/sets at various points in the series chronology. There are often heated debates amongst fans about whether the Publication Order or Chronological Order should be used as a reading order, often with differing opinions on first and second reads.

Currently, the only way I can see to to this is to create a second series (ie Honor Harrington: Publication Order + Honor Harrington: Chronological Order) in the UI, which is clunky.

Ideally, the series should exist only once and there should be the option to add multiple orderings (ie. Publication, Series).

Why would this be helpful?

My library is currently rather small but I have already run into this issue multiple times (Honor Harrington, Star Wars Legends, Dragonlance, the clusterf**k of subseries in C. J. Cherryh's Alliance-Union Universe).

If I'm willing to do the work to initially set the metadata for both orderings I would very much like to be able to look at a series, have it show my currently selected ordering, ie. 'Ordering: Publication Order' (where 'Publication Order' is my arbitrarily supplied string), and be able to click on that to switch to my other entered orderings (ie. Chronological Order).

Future Implementation (Screenshot)

I... have a completely non-visual mind. I believe that I described my vision in the above box.

Here is about as visual as I get:
image

Audiobookshelf Server Version

2.17.1

Current Implementation (Screenshot)

image

Originally created by @teotikalki on GitHub (Dec 27, 2024). ### Type of Enhancement Web Interface/Frontend ### Describe the Feature/Enhancement There are a lot of series which expand over time to include books/sets at various points in the series chronology. There are often heated debates amongst fans about whether the Publication Order or Chronological Order should be used as a reading order, often with differing opinions on first and second reads. Currently, the only way I can see to to this is to create a second series (ie Honor Harrington: Publication Order + Honor Harrington: Chronological Order) in the UI, which is clunky. Ideally, the series should exist only once and there should be the option to add multiple orderings (ie. Publication, Series). ### Why would this be helpful? My library is currently rather small but I have already run into this issue multiple times (Honor Harrington, Star Wars Legends, Dragonlance, the clusterf**k of subseries in C. J. Cherryh's Alliance-Union Universe). If I'm willing to do the work to initially set the metadata for both orderings I would very much like to be able to look at a series, have it show my currently selected ordering, ie. 'Ordering: Publication Order' (where 'Publication Order' is my arbitrarily supplied string), and be able to click on that to switch to my other entered orderings (ie. Chronological Order). ### Future Implementation (Screenshot) I... have a completely non-visual mind. I believe that I described my vision in the above box. Here is about as visual as I get: ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/11f1a517-7e81-41b4-8d53-b545d5f00a5b) ### Audiobookshelf Server Version 2.17.1 ### Current Implementation (Screenshot) ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f98f8c70-9a39-4e01-8bdb-eb8b08a30eaf)
adam added the enhancement label 2026-04-25 00:07:10 +02:00
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:11 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@nichwall commented on GitHub (Dec 27, 2024):

People usually use Collections for alternate orderings of books in a series or universe.

@nichwall commented on GitHub (Dec 27, 2024): People usually use Collections for alternate orderings of books in a series or universe.
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:11 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@teotikalki commented on GitHub (Dec 28, 2024):

Your own documentation describes Series and Subseries (https://www.audiobookshelf.org/guides/subseries) with one of the examples that will eventually end up in my personal library (I loved the Foundation books when I was younger).
I believe that the ordering of subseries will rarely ever be ambiguous. The ordering of the Series, however, is.
Perhaps my issue is somewhat semantic. I believe that you are suggesting to:

  1. Pick a 'main order' and use it for the Series order.
  2. Make a Collection, which is sort of a fancy playlist, with the 'alternate' order
    The semantic issue is this:
  3. In my mind, all of these books are part of one 'Collection'. There are simply two ways of ordering that collection.
  4. Series has an order, but only one, even though there is often not a clearly accepted order for a series. This makes the idea of 'primary order' and 'alternate order' feel very wrong. 'Publication order' and 'Chronological order'
  5. Official documentation describes using Series and subseries for organization in a way that seems perfectly logical and covers every need EXCEPT alternate orderings, so if there is only one ordering then these books will be represented perfectly by one Series, several subseries, and exactly zero Collections. This strongly suggests that Collections are not how such a thing should be organized.
@teotikalki commented on GitHub (Dec 28, 2024): Your own documentation describes Series and Subseries (https://www.audiobookshelf.org/guides/subseries) with one of the examples that will eventually end up in my personal library (I loved the Foundation books when I was younger). I believe that the ordering of subseries will rarely ever be ambiguous. The ordering of the Series, however, is. Perhaps my issue is somewhat semantic. I believe that you are suggesting to: 1. Pick a 'main order' and use it for the Series order. 2. Make a Collection, which is sort of a fancy playlist, with the 'alternate' order The semantic issue is this: 1. In my mind, all of these books are part of one 'Collection'. There are simply two ways of ordering that collection. 2. Series has an order, but only one, even though there is often not a clearly accepted order for a series. This makes the idea of 'primary order' and 'alternate order' feel very *wrong*. 'Publication order' and 'Chronological order' 3. Official documentation describes using Series and subseries for organization in a way that seems perfectly logical and covers every need EXCEPT alternate orderings, so if there is only one ordering then these books will be represented perfectly by one Series, several subseries, and exactly zero Collections. This strongly suggests that Collections are not how such a thing *should* be organized.
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:12 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@averageyogi commented on GitHub (Jan 7, 2025):

Related to #1674, #3712 with regards to default Series sort order. Currently the default for non-numbered books is "Added At" order. Like I said in one of those issues, I don't think the Series view should have the same sort options as the general Library, but a toggle between Publication and Series Number/"Chronological" could be helpful for some series (for the rest they would just be identical orderings anyway).

[Edit] Just checking again to see if it's changed, and default order is still not "Publish Year", but at least one series I have is now defaulting to "Size" order when "Expanding Sub Series" instead of "Added At" that it was previously. Either it was changed, or it's possibly random.

@averageyogi commented on GitHub (Jan 7, 2025): Related to #1674, #3712 with regards to default Series sort order. Currently the default for non-numbered books is "Added At" order. Like I said in one of those issues, I don't think the Series view should have the same sort options as the general Library, but a toggle between Publication and Series Number/"Chronological" could be helpful for some series (for the rest they would just be identical orderings anyway). [Edit] Just checking again to see if it's changed, and default order is still not "Publish Year", but at least one series I have is now defaulting to "Size" order when "Expanding Sub Series" instead of "Added At" that it was previously. Either it was changed, or it's possibly random.
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:12 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@damccull commented on GitHub (Mar 23, 2025):

I just add the books to two or more series. For Halo, as an example, I name the series Halo (Publish Order) and Halo (Chronological Order) and that suffices. It would be cool to have multiple orderings on the single series but this is an option to use as a workaround for now.

Edit: As an aside, I use collections to hold books from multiple series that I want to see in one place. I have Brandon Sanderson's Cosmere books in a "Cosmere" collection, while each series (Stormlight, Mistborn, etc) is in its own series. I also include in the collection individual books that have no series. Would be cool to order books in a collection separately from series, though.

@damccull commented on GitHub (Mar 23, 2025): I just add the books to two or more series. For Halo, as an example, I name the series `Halo (Publish Order)` and `Halo (Chronological Order)` and that suffices. It would be cool to have multiple orderings on the single series but this is an option to use as a workaround for now. Edit: As an aside, I use collections to hold books from multiple series that I want to see in one place. I have Brandon Sanderson's Cosmere books in a "Cosmere" collection, while each series (Stormlight, Mistborn, etc) is in its own series. I also include in the collection individual books that have no series. Would be cool to order books in a collection separately from series, though.
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:12 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@teotikalki commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2025):

"I just add the books to two or more series. For Halo, as an example, I name the series Halo (Publish Order) and Halo (Chronological Order) and that suffices. It would be cool to have multiple orderings on the single series but this is an option to use as a workaround for now."

@damccull Speak for yourself. What suffices for you is not a universal truth.

I am aware of clunky hacks. I made a feature request because I want to do this well. What you have described is one series with two orderings. Having to make up arbitrary 'series' is a bad workaround.

Let me be clear: I am not making this feature request because I can't currently figure out how to listen to audiobooks in order. I'm making it because being able to handle multiple orderings for a series is necessary for proper library management. ABS is currently great for listening to audiobooks and poor at managing audiobook libraries.

@damccull I suspect that you are in the majority who 'want to listen' and who find library management to be a 'means to an end'. I'm in the minority who find satisfaction in a properly tagged/etc library ITSELF. For me, the library is 'the end'. Listening is satisfying when I do it, but the library itself is satisfying all the time. Making a good library 'is the goal' as opposed to just 'a way to listen to some things'.

I honestly don't think that you were trying to be offensive, but 'Hey, I don't need this feature to make me happy so you shouldn't need it either' is rather offensive. If you had said 'that suffices for me' then you'd come off as an individual with an opinion to share rather than an individual who thinks differing opinions are less valid than their own.

@teotikalki commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2025): "I just add the books to two or more series. For Halo, as an example, I name the series Halo (Publish Order) and Halo (Chronological Order) and that suffices. It would be cool to have multiple orderings on the single series but this is an option to use as a workaround for now." @damccull Speak for yourself. What suffices for you is not a universal truth. I am aware of clunky hacks. I made a feature request because I want to do this *well*. What you have described is *one* series with *two orderings*. Having to make up arbitrary 'series' is *a bad workaround*. Let me be clear: I am not making this feature request because I can't currently figure out how to listen to audiobooks in order. I'm making it because being able to handle multiple orderings for a series is *necessary* for *proper library management*. ABS is currently great for *listening to audiobooks* and poor at *managing audiobook libraries*. @damccull I suspect that you are in the majority who 'want to listen' and who find library management to be a 'means to an end'. I'm in the minority who find satisfaction in a properly tagged/etc library ITSELF. For me, the library is 'the end'. Listening is satisfying when I do it, but the library itself is satisfying *all the time*. Making a good library 'is the goal' as opposed to just 'a way to listen to some things'. I honestly don't think that you were trying to be offensive, but 'Hey, I don't need this feature to make me happy so you shouldn't need it either' *is* rather offensive. If you had said 'that suffices *for me*' then you'd come off as an individual with an opinion to share rather than an individual who thinks differing opinions are less valid than their own.
adam commented 2026-04-25 00:07:12 +02:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@damccull commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 2025):

Hey, I was just trying to offer you a temporary alternative. I wasn't disagreeing with your request. Chill, please. In no way was my comment offensive to anyone unless you just wanted to take offense. I will be unsubscribing to this issue now. Good luck with life.

@damccull commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 2025): Hey, I was just trying to offer you a temporary alternative. I wasn't disagreeing with your request. Chill, please. In no way was my comment offensive to anyone unless you just wanted to take offense. I will be unsubscribing to this issue now. Good luck with life.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
authentication
backlog
bug
chapter editor
config-issue
ebooks
encoding/embedding
enhancement
help wanted
listening sessions & progress
planned
possible plugin
progress sync
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 sorting/filtering/searching
unable to reproduce
upload
users & permissions
waiting
No Label enhancement
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam (Adam Melkus)
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/audiobookshelf#2441
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?