Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for markdown as an alternative to HTML for ApexDoc and overview content #6

Closed
SCWells72 opened this issue Mar 2, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@SCWells72
Copy link
Owner

ApexDoc comments and the user-specified overview content (-f/--overview argument) are based on HTML. Given the prevalence of markdown, it would be great if that could be used for all content authoring instead of/in addition to HTML.

@SCWells72 SCWells72 added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 2, 2023
@SCWells72
Copy link
Owner Author

SCWells72 commented Apr 27, 2023

After tinkering with this for a bit, I'm starting to think that perhaps full markdown support for documentation comment text isn't necessarily as important as support for some of the most common markdown text styling and simple formatting syntax, specifically the following:

  • Code via `text` - already supported
  • Bold text via **text**
  • Italic text via _text_ or *text*
  • Strikethrough text via ~~text~~
  • Heading text via # text, ## text, and ### text
  • Block quote via > text
  • Link via [Text](url) - including references to type/member declarations
  • Fenced code block via ```text``` - need to determine if there's a simple way to add language-specific syntax highlighting
  • Ordered list via 1. text - likely single-level for simplicity until I hear otherwise
  • Unordered list via - text or * text - likely single-level for simplicity until I hear otherwise

I would then also support markdown-based overview files and could convert them to HTML using either the simple markdown syntax support described above or one of the aforementioned Markdown-to-HTML libs that provide more complete support. I think starting with the more simple version should be sufficient until/unless I hear otherwise.

@SCWells72
Copy link
Owner Author

Delivered in 1.0.0.5.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant