Re: [w3c/IndexedDB] sorted list by code unit (#179)

I'm not quite buying it.  I mean, yes, they aren't _exactly_ UTF-16, in exactly the same way as we're discussing in the WHATWG infra space just now. But really they are strings and there is a clear relationship to Unicode. The sort you mention is fast and easy, but ignores supplementary characters and the unfortunate sorting of those characters a surrogate pairs. I18n would prefer to make supplementary characters work as first class citizens. And not that this is an index, not just a bag of strings. There is provision for range operations and these fail utterly on surrogate pairs.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/179#issuecomment-288900376