I pulled together a large number of records, sorted as needed and cut/pasted
into a new page to get the records back in numerical order (no skips). I used
this list to send an important message to global clients.
Later, I noticed (by accident) that key names had been DELETED from the
sort, so I set up a test to track a specific record. I had about 1400 records
that included a "country". I filtered the main headings then told it to only
select records that include UNITED STATES, US and USA in the "country"
column. My test name that included UNITED STATES never made the cut, but when
I set the sort to "all" again, it showed up. I made sure my test record had
every field completed so I can't think of a reason Excel would have skipped
it.
Is there a bug impacting the sort function? I'm not at all confident that my
data is being handled correctly, and I know for sure that my sorted list did
not include all of the names I expected.

Signature
KA
Bob Greenblatt - 21 Aug 2007 21:24 GMT
On 8/21/07 4:18 PM, in article
2D16639B-03F1-455C-959D-921FD74776AF@microsoft.com, "KA"
> I pulled together a large number of records, sorted as needed and cut/pasted
> into a new page to get the records back in numerical order (no skips). I used
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> data is being handled correctly, and I know for sure that my sorted list did
> not include all of the names I expected.
As far as I know there are no bugs involving sort or filtering. If you can
be more specific about your data and what you did and what you got vs. what
you expected, we'd be glad to help. Alternatively, if you'll send me your
workbook, I'll be happy to take a look.

Signature
Bob Greenblatt [MVP], Macintosh
bobgreenblattATmsnDOTcom
jpdphd - 21 Aug 2007 21:32 GMT
> I pulled together a large number of records, sorted as needed and cut/pasted
> into a new page to get the records back in numerical order (no skips). I used
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> --
> KA
This is a Mac Office Excel group, so you're not in the right place for
an Excel 2007 question.
However, I am curious whether might have used "AND" instead of "OR"
somewhere in your search criteria.
KA - 21 Aug 2007 22:00 GMT
Shoot! There were so many choices, I was bound to end up in the wrong place.
Thanks for the tip about sorting tho, I'll check that out.

Signature
KA
> > I pulled together a large number of records, sorted as needed and cut/pasted
> > into a new page to get the records back in numerical order (no skips). I used
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> However, I am curious whether might have used "AND" instead of "OR"
> somewhere in your search criteria.