-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
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
Improving doctag support and theme design in general #3170
Comments
Perhaps what is needed is a canonical "template theme" with comments explaining all the comment scopes and someone goes thru and kind of "fills it out" as they build their theme. Then regardless of naming/scoping it's clear what needs to happen and any "caveats" can be explained? |
Candidly, a template theme punchlist would be helpful. I can't speak for other theme maintainers, but I'm pulled in a lot of different directions lately and don't have a lot of time to follow the nuance of the theme's construction. |
The problem
GitHub's doctag highlighting is so nice and making me jealous. I suppose we're quite close actually, but in thinking about this it brought up a lot of questions about how we classify doctors.
GitHub
Us
So lets tear apart a single doctag:
And if we look closely we find:
*
comment decoration@param
is technically documentation. (block scope)@param
the "tag" itself-
{}
punctuation around the typestring | HighlightOptions
the type itselfoptionsOrCode
variable name-
punctuationthe code to highlight
descriptionCurrently we break that down line this:
This is "ok" until say you want to apply a background to perhaps just the tag portion... it seems we could perhaps be more granular here...
Also there is an issue with theme "leaking".
I've been thinking a lot about new theme designers and what type of experience they should have. Do we make it easy or hard to design themes, etc... how "fiddly" are we, etc... Right now if you don't even know what a doctag is and you design a theme without support then you probably get your doctag
type
s andvariable
s colored entirely unexpectedly with whatever color you used in the outside source. Is this desired behavior?Or if you do design with support... you add a
doctag
rule... did you remember the fact thatvariable
andtype
could be nested within? See #3167 for another example of this unintentional "leaking" of CSS.I wonder if all of these shouldn't be sub scopes instead to prevent this leakage - or perhaps the leakage is sometimes desirable? To me (with a theme designer hat on) I would NOT expect the type inside a comment doctag to automatically be highlighted exactly the same as a type inside my code proper.
Some possible scopes:
block.doctag
(TextMate would call thismeta.doctag
or something)doctag.tag
doctag.type
doctag.variable
doctag.description
{}
in type would either not be included or labeled as punctuation.I make the first a block/meta scope (vs just
doctag
because (like TM) I think in general we'd like to discourage people highlighting entire scopes, but they can still be useful for targeted rules.For reference TextMate does this with it's top-level scopes (
entity.name
,storage.type
,variable
), so perhaps we're not doing the wrong thing after-all. Though it still feels like the behavior wheredoctag
wraps everything should perhaps be changed.comment.block.documentation
(the larger block scope)@param
-storage.type.class.jsdoc
string
-entity.name.type.instance.jsdoc
codeToHighlight
-variable.other.jsdoc
There is actually no scope for the "whole doctag line"...
comment.block.documentation
is applied to the entire/**
comment, irregardless of doctors...Other ideas
Perhaps this is solved with better docs, or some sort of theme design tool with examples? IE, a minimal version of "demo" that has to look "passable" for multiple languages, etc...
CC @highlightjs/theme-maintainers @highlightjs/core
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: