The "correct order of dynamic routing", eh?
For the operations in your screenshot, order doesn't matter!
Routing (also not just for a dynamic routing protocol) is dynamic. I.e. it's constantly being revised, as route information is first received and as that information is revised.
For example (using your screenshot list), likely a router will learn, early, about its connected networks and add them to its route table. However, such connected networks need an "up" interface, which can, of course, change status. I.e. The route table is subject to dynamic change moment by moment based on the current up/down status of an interface.
As an aside, your list doesn't mention static routes. These might even be processed before connected interfaces, but even they, as you manually add or remove them from the config, will also, dynamically, may add or remove them from the route table. Further, they might also be redistributed into a dynamic routing protocol(s).
Now, even before considering your other listed processes, which appear to be also tied to dynamic routing protocol, which should be processed first, connected interfaces or static routes? Does it truly matter? The reason it doesn't much matter, is because we understand there's a huge difference between a converged network, versus one that's in convergence. I.e. the latter doesn't yet reflect the true state/topology of the network.
Dynamic protocols, only really differ from connected networks and static networks, in that often there's more "lag" for the network to reach a converged state.
It's possible, in your list, doing some of those operations before others might speed convergence, but by how much? Beyond possible convergence speed, if the same final (converged) result is obtained, is there really a "correct order" for doing them?
Consider 1 plus 2 plus 3, which equals six. Does it logically matter whether you do (1 + 2) + 3 vs. 1 + (2 + 3) vs. (1 + 3) + 2? Further, consider one of the operands might arrive later than the others, but there's no way to know that before it happens. I.e. if "2" usually, but not always, arrives after "1" and "3", do you go ahead and compute 1 + 3, as soon as you have them, or do you wait a bit, waiting to see if a third operand arrives before doing the sum? (BTW, this is a real issue with dynamic routing protocols, i.e. they want to converge quickly, but do not want to do "needless" route calculations. It's often a trade-off, and you can sometimes "tune" your dynamic routing protocol to converge quicker or slower.)
The forgoing, again, is based on your screen shot listing, For parts of actual route processing, order very much matters, e.g. building the route table based on AD and/or prefix length, and/or etc. Likewise, in math, it doesn't matter how we do 1 + 2 + 3, but it does matter how we do 1 + 2 * 3.
Yet at the high level, again while a network is converging, we might compute 1 * 3 because, again, "2" hasn't arrived yet.
Or to recap your screen shot list "correct order" you might also say there's no correct order, because all of those are event based.
PS:
Also realize, in the "functions" listed in your screen list, in the real world, each have their own timing/event considerations, across the topology, as a whole.
Consider the same area OSPF ring topology
R1(ASR)<gig>R2(ASR)<ISDN>R3(9xx ISR)<10Mbps>R1
with other routers connected to R1 and R3.
R2 just comes on-line, any guess which R2 neighbor it might establish full adjacency with first? Does sequence of your screen list "dynamic routing steps" make a difference, before there's full convergence?
