Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 25, 2021. It is now read-only.

Render CommonMark in item text fields everywhere #180

Closed
sanmai-NL opened this issue Oct 3, 2017 · 6 comments
Closed

Render CommonMark in item text fields everywhere #180

sanmai-NL opened this issue Oct 3, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@sanmai-NL
Copy link

It appears you cannot link to e.g. online specifications in the texts describing SPC items. That does seem to me like a very useful feature, however. One solution would be to allow CommonMark in there.

@vitiral
Copy link
Owner

vitiral commented Oct 3, 2017

You should be able to do:

[SPC-foo]
text = '''
The online specification can be found [here](https://google.com)
'''

Note that https:// is required for web-links.

Here is an example of links being embeded in text

If you mean that you can't do links in the done field, I just opened #181 to fix that eventually.

@sanmai-NL
Copy link
Author

sanmai-NL commented Oct 5, 2017

This does not work for me when using art export html. It shows the text in a table as plain text.

Update: I see it does not work on the index.html page, but it does when clicking through to the specific item.

@sanmai-NL sanmai-NL changed the title Allow CommonMark in item texts Render CommonMark in item text fields everywhere Oct 5, 2017
@vitiral
Copy link
Owner

vitiral commented Oct 5, 2017

Interesting -- do you mean it doesn't work from the list view when looking at text? I think the text column currently displays the raw text, which would explain that.

I'm not sure what behavior is appropriate here. I currently truncate text when viewing in the list to prevent it from exploding the list view.

@sanmai-NL
Copy link
Author

Perhaps remove the text column then?

@vitiral
Copy link
Owner

vitiral commented Oct 5, 2017

Maybe... I'll have to think more about it. I allow you to search it, it would be kinda weird to not be able to view it. But that might be the right solution.

@vitiral
Copy link
Owner

vitiral commented Nov 4, 2017

see issue #193, I think we have a potential solution.

@vitiral vitiral closed this as completed Nov 4, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants