Not me.

Thinking about this a while later, I think that 'name' for any given 
source should always be the primary field. Otherwise there is no 
guarantee that there will be a primary field that we can link, or use 
in other display contexts.



Since people can choose to re-label that field, does anyone have any 
problems with this?

You should use a composite field for concatenating those fields, but 
that's a seperate issue. I'm fine with making name a configurable 
field like the others; only thing we have to do is make sure that 
there's always a link to view the contact, whether or not name is 
present in the column.

        Moving to HEAD. Can you say more about why you don't have anything 
that's a name field?



In the application that I'm interfacing with, the fields are separated 
into Last Name, First Name, Middle Name.  I want to be able to 
concatenate those three fields into a single name, but beyond that, 
the fact is that the name isn't the most important field in the 
priority of the users who plan on using this.  They would like to see 
the Organization field as the first field instead, and perhaps even 
the position field second, before the combined name field which I 
could perhaps interject in somehow.

Moving to HEAD. Can you say more about why you don't have anything 
that's a name field?

I need to be able to set another attribute as the first column other 
than object_name.  This is especially useful if someone has an 
addressbook that does not contain object_name which is the case here.   
I would like to provide sponsorship of this task and as such, pay a 
bounty.  Please e-mail me for more details.  I have submitted this to 
the stable queue becuase I want the feature to be done on the existing 
1.x codebase if possible.