Automatically create collapsed/implicit/shortcut reference links about remark-reference-links HOT 4 CLOSED

I've had only happy times with shortcut links, despite their theoretical flaws — I guess I've been lucky 😄

Say a link label was 999 characters long, would you still want a definition label with the same length?

Personally, I wouldn't want a link label that long any more than I'd want a definition label that long.

Sounds like I'm right that the static phrasing content throws a real wrench in the possibility ...

The only thing I really don't like about numbered references & definitions is that — when systematically applied, always counting from the document's top to its bottom — this means the addition or removal of a link in the middle of the document will result in changes to links & definitions all over the document, making a nasty diff. I can live with that, though.

from remark-reference-links.

Yeah, I did think about that, too. Considering the tradeoff of markdown legibility vs diff cleanliness, I might choose the legibility of the markdown, and so favor the bare numbers instead of potentially confusing-looking text 😬

from remark-reference-links.

Indeed, there are three types of reference links. Shortcuts ([asd]), collapsed ([asd][]), and full ([asd][fgh]). It’s unfortunate that shortcuts exist, they are extremely unclear. For example, adding [x]: example.com to a GFM document disables task lists 🤯. I strongly recommend against using shortcuts, and remark-lint warns about them I believe? To either escape one of the brackets, or add [].

Reference links are also fragile in CommonMark: [[asd]](https://link.com?) turns into a link for [asd] when it is defined. When it isn’t, it turns into a link to link.com. As definitions can be defined anywhere in a document, it makes it impossible to parse Markdown in a nice stream.

I personally do enjoy using collapsed and full reference links, so I see some use in your request. But indeed, the [your **favorite** dog] example is annoying. As link labels can be super long, and indeed contain static phrasing content... Say a link label was 999 characters long, would you still want a definition label with the same length? Wouldn’t a short label be better?

from remark-reference-links.

A different idea for numbers/letters/other orders: what if we “hash” the paragraph? E.g., first letter of first three and last three words:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet[1], consectetur adipisicing elit[2].

Yields:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet[lidcae-1], consectetur adipisicing elit[lidcae-2].

That should result in cleaner diffs

from remark-reference-links.