The topic of field guide sequences has frequently arisen on this forum, with repeated agonising about the inconvenience caused by taxonomic changes. I'm sorry if my irritation sometimes shows, but the regular complainers often seem to take for granted that their ideas for an alternative approach would be universally welcomed.
This time, Robert has started a specific thread pleading for the adoption of a common, fixed sequence to be used in all future field guides. Three days ago, in the other thread, he suggested the adoption of the obsolete HBW sequence (Morony et al 1975) as a readily available standard. This has since morphed into support for the establishment of a Howell et al-style non-taxonomic world sequence.
But it's not clear who is expected to design and promote this new baseline. I suggest that Robert should take the world list of his choice, arrange the 200+ families into his preferred sequence, and publish it somewhere, or send it to Nat Geo, Princeton, Sibley, Helm, HarperCollins, New Holland etc etc for consideration. Otherwise, these posts serve no more purpose than complaining about the weather.