Add support for phrasing content

[wooorm]

Closes GH-56.
Closes GH-57.
Closes GH-58.

[wooorm]

@d4rekanguok here’s how I’d do it. Could you check? The slugs/URLs aren’t perfect, though. And they’re different from GitHub. Although this has always been a problem, so it isn’t new.

[d4rekanguok]

I tested it out & it worked great!! Can't wait to see this get merged. Thank you again for the swift response.

[BarryThePenguin]

One option could be to only copy text nodes

[BarryThePenguin]

Hmm... that gets tricky for image nodes and the like..

[BarryThePenguin]

Without doing too much to turn other nodes into text nodes, this is probably the simplest approach

Pretty sure this won't introduce any breaking changes either?

Otherwise, this looks good 👍

[wooorm]

Thanks for reviewing both!

@BarryThePenguin This will definitely break things! Potentially for the better.
I think people don’t typically include syntax in headings, except for a big part of the audience where they use inline code to document API functions, which we’re doing in this project as well.
I think copying that syntax over is actually better. But that might be an opinion, so we could also make it an option?

[wooorm]

@BarryThePenguin What do you think re my previous comment?

[BarryThePenguin]

Yup. That makes sense. The expected test output has changed, so making it a breaking change makes sense to me 👍🏻

One thought I had.. If this new behaviour were optional, we could release it under an option, which defaults to disabled. If we wanted this to then be the default behaviour, we could release a major version that reflects this.

I'm happy to take care of that if that's how we want to move forward?

[wooorm]

@BarryThePenguin Regarding keeping the current behaviour as the default option: I think the new behaviour makes more sense as the default. I propose releasing this as a major, and if issues come in to investigate what users would like: 1) the previous behaviour, or 2) some sort of node filtering where they can choose which nodes to keep, etc, or 3) maybe something else.

For this PR: I just noticed that images are also included in the TOC. Is that a good idea? I don’t think people really use images in headings (except maybe the main heading of a readme, but that doesn’t appear in the TOC), so we can either a) not copy images, or b) wait for what people want and potentially allow filtering (2 above) of nodes later.

[BarryThePenguin]

Sounds good 👍🏻