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

cross-package links in the percent encoding article #180

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tayloraswift
Copy link

hi Karl,

swift-url has been listed on swiftinit; on swiftinit these cross-package links will just work :)

@karwa
Copy link
Owner

karwa commented Oct 18, 2023

Awesome! Is this syntax compatible with DocC?

I still need to fix the documentation workflow on this repo. I think it broke due to GitHub updating the version of Node installed on their runners.

@tayloraswift
Copy link
Author

these links won't resolve successfully on DocC, as DocC is a single-module documentation engine.

@karwa
Copy link
Owner

karwa commented Oct 18, 2023

It seems that there has been recent work on supporting cross-module links in DocC: apple/swift-docc#710

Of course I'd want to use something that is DocC-compatible, and it would be unfortunate to break swiftinit when that happens.

@tayloraswift
Copy link
Author

tayloraswift commented Oct 18, 2023

as far as i understand from David’s proposal, the scope of that effort is supporting cross-target references between modules within the same package. the references in this article are references to standard library symbols, and i am not aware of any plans to support that from the DocC side yet.

for what it’s worth, swiftinit is backwards-compatible with DocC symbol links, so all of those will still work. (and you can freely mix syntaces within the same article.) you just won’t be able to use unidoc features like multi-component symbol links or cross-package references.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants