Hi.
Just some info, I noticed before that when working with Tainacan, order of numbers goes:
11,12,3,4,5,6
I understand why and the only bypass (that I know) is to add zeros in front of smaller numbers but sometimes it really is not a best solution. For example, in archives, unique signature of archival fond/collecton is usually consisted of several parts
e.g.
HR-DADU-250
HR (country code for Croatia)
DADU (code of our archive)
250 (fond number)
The problem is that the signature is HR-DADU-250 and can not be HR-DADU-0250 because signature is often used for citation in scientific papers and it really can’t be 0250.
Just asking, if that is something you have on your roadmap or not considered at all?
Thank you 
Are you talking about a numeric metadata? Because if yest then it should not be like that for sure. That is the expected ordering result of a simple text metadata type.
1 curtida
In fact yes, I’m talking about simple text metadata type. Unfortunately, numeric metadata allows only numbers, and that unique signature I’m talking about are composed of text and numbers. And dashes and sometimes dots between numbers. (e.g. HR-DADU-520.1.2.3.4 or HR-DADU-21.532)
EDIT: in fact, the imagined metadata type is created as taxonomy
Both Taxonomies and Simple Text will order numbers in alphabetical order and not numerical, that is a hard constraint as it is related to how data is stored and queried in the database. So in that case you’re stuck with adding '0’s, sorry…
1 curtida