From: Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜) [mailto:jungs...@google.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:34 PM
>> As for the locale identifiers, my understanding is that Windows APIs (newer
>> 'name-based' locale APIs) more or less follows BCP 47.
>>
Picking this back up from this August thread. I went
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>> >> > The alternative is to add a function within setVersion to set the
>> >> > language
>> >> > which actually seems less elegant.
>> >>
>> >> I don't understand what you mean by this.
>> >
>> > Have a setLanguage method on IDBDatabase that c
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜) <
jungs...@google.com> wrote:
> + adding the authors of BCP 47 (Mark Davis and Addison Phillips) and
> Richard Ishida (w3c i18n)
>
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Jeremy Orlow
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> >> >> However I think it's very rare that this will be needed. And there
> are
> >> >> ways to somewhat work around it by using separate databases. So I
> >> >> would probably say that
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> 2 additional questions: What standard will define the language codes and
> the associated collation algorithm? And what's the behavior for an
> implementation that doesn't support that particular language?
Very good questions. Are there sp
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>> >> However I think it's very rare that this will be needed. And there are
>> >> ways to somewhat work around it by using separate databases. So I
>> >> would probably say that lets keep it database-wide for now, and
>> >> reconsider in versio
2 additional questions: What standard will define the language codes and
the associated collation algorithm? And what's the behavior for an
implementation that doesn't support that particular language?
J
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:09 AM,
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Jeremy Orlow
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow
> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro
> >>
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro <
> pablo.cas...@microsoft.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
> >> Orlow
>
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro
> wrote:
>>
>> From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
>> Orlow
>> Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:18 AM
>>
>> >> I think we should first break down the use cases
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro wrote:
>
> From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
> Orlow
> Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:18 AM
>
> >> I think we should first break down the use cases and look at how many of
> them just need _a_ sort order, how man
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 3:36 AM
>> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pablo Castro
>> wrote:
>> > We had some discussions about collation algorithms and
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:18 AM
>> I think we should first break down the use cases and look at how many of
>> them just need _a_ sort order, how many of them a per-database sort order is
>> ok, and how many of
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pablo Castro
> wrote:
> > We had some discussions about collation algorithms and such in the past,
> but I don't think we have settled on the language aspect of it. In order to
> have stores and indexes so
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pablo Castro
wrote:
> We had some discussions about collation algorithms and such in the past, but
> I don't think we have settled on the language aspect of it. In order to have
> stores and indexes sort character-based keys in a way that is consistent with
> u
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Pablo Castro wrote:
>
> From: Mikeal Rogers [mailto:mikeal.rog...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:35 PM
>
> >> Why not just use the unicode collation algorithm?
> >>
> >> Then you won't have to hint the locale.
>
> Unless I'm missing something, the
From: Mikeal Rogers [mailto:mikeal.rog...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:35 PM
>> Why not just use the unicode collation algorithm?
>>
>> Then you won't have to hint the locale.
Unless I'm missing something, the UCA defines the general algorithm for
collating strings bu
Why not just use the unicode collation algorithm?
Then you won't have to hint the locale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_collation_algorithm
CouchDB uses some definitions around sorting complex types like arrays and
objects but when it comes down to sorting strings it just defaults to to t
19 matches
Mail list logo
