effect.check() modify events when construct is for document and has resolver about micromark HOT 9 CLOSED

Awesome, glad it worked!

I looked through the readmes and here are some suggestions, If you’re interested:

• The remark-definition-list usage example uses ./index, but should probably import the package name?
• For remark plugins, I recommend using a default export for the plugin. This means they can be used by the engine (remark-cli), such as with remark input.md --use remark-definition-list --output output.md (only with a default can the engine/cli “find” the plugin).
  All other plugins also use a default export, so it’ll help users because there is a single API
  You can export the same value as both a named export and a default export btw, so it can be a minor release!
• You can add the plugin to the List of plugins in remark’s readme https://github.com/remarkjs/remark/blob/main/doc/plugins.md#list-of-plugins
• Same for the extension here, maybe a new “Community extensions” heading, with this extension, under the current list of extensions? https://github.com/micromark/micromark#list-of-extensions
• There’s a typo in the micromark extension readme: Definitio instead of Definition. Also develepment -> development!

👋

from micromark.

@wooorm

I published new version including your suggestions, bug fix, some improvement.
Can I ask you to add my plugin and extension to remark / micromark readme?

• You can add the plugin to the List of plugins in remark’s readme https://github.com/remarkjs/remark/blob/main/doc/plugins.md#list-of-plugins
• Same for the extension here, maybe a new “Community extensions” heading, with this extension, under the current list of extensions? https://github.com/micromark/micromark#list-of-extensions

from micromark.

Done!

from micromark.

Maybe I can help better if you share what you want to do?
Perhaps it’s possible to not use containers? Containers are quite complex.
And indeed, resolve changes the events.

from micromark.

@wooorm Thank you for your reply.

I've been trying to implement a micromark extension for definition list in this spec.
For example, following markdown

Apple
:   Pomaceous fruit of plants of the genus Malus in 
    the family Rosaceae.

Orange
:   The fruit of an evergreen tree of the genus Citrus.

would makes the following HTML.

<dl>
<dt>Apple</dt>
<dd>Pomaceous fruit of plants of the genus Malus in 
the family Rosaceae.</dd>

<dt>Orange</dt>
<dd>The fruit of an evergreen tree of the genus Citrus.</dd>
</dl>

I read setext-underline.js and list.js and imitated them because their syntaxes look like one which I wanted to handle.
Is there any way to implement this syntax extension without containers?

from micromark.

If you really want to do this, I think you might be better of looking at footnote definitions for the “container” part, those colons, see: https://github.com/micromark/micromark-extension-footnote/blob/561f958a9bf33a1f3f0d2f61b370199dbff2610b/dev/lib/syntax.js#L45-L49.

But, honestly, I think this is a bad designed syntax extension, that doesn’t match how markdown works otherwise.

Better solutions in my opinion are either directives (Arbitrary extension mechanism in § Extending markdown):

:::definition[Orange]
The fruit of an evergreen tree of the genus Citrus.
:::

:::definition[Apple]
*   Pomaceous fruit of plants of the genus Malus in 
    the family Rosaceae.

*   An American computer company.
:::

:::definition[Term 1, Term 2]
Definition a
:::

Or (ab)using lists (Using and abusing markdown to add new meaning in § Extending markdown):

*   **Orange**

    The fruit of an evergreen tree of the genus Citrus.

*   **Apple**

    *   Pomaceous fruit of plants of the genus Malus in 
        the family Rosaceae.

    *   An American computer company.

*   **Term 1**
    **Term 2**

    Definition a

from micromark.

@wooorm Thank you, I'll take a look at micromark-extension-footnote.

And indeed, resolve changes the events.

Well, the behavior about effect.check / effect.attempt / resolveTo seems a bit inconsistent for me.

• effect.attempt (onsuccessfulconstruct) calls addResult which invokes resolveTo to modify events. This is straightfoward.
• effect.check (onsuccessfulcheck) doesn't do, but if its argument construct calls effect.attempt inside it, it would run resolveTo and modify events consequently.

If this behavior is not a problem, please close this issue.

And thank you for your help!

from micromark.

Just FYI.

Thanks to your kind help, I've finally published my extension package.

• micromark-extension-definition-list
• mdast-util-definition-list
• remark-definition-list

Regards

from micromark.

Going to close this, as this particular thing is intended. Maybe some docs somewhere might be good, and I’d appreciate a PR for that if you have a suggestion!

from micromark.