Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

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

[Discussion] Do we use a .NET Markdown Parser Library instead of our own? #3200

Closed
4 tasks
michael-hawker opened this issue Mar 26, 2020 · 12 comments
Closed
4 tasks
Milestone

Comments

@michael-hawker
Copy link
Member

michael-hawker commented Mar 26, 2020

Describe the problem this feature would solve

We have a lot of overhead for the MarkdownTextBlock supporting Markdown via our own Markdown parser. It may make more sense to refactor on top of a .NET Standard library that's maintained by a larger community, like Markdig.

This however, would require updating our MarkdownRenderer code to do all the construction from the AST.

Describe the solution

Take a dependency on a markdown parser instead of maintaining our own.

Additional context

We were thinking as part of #3062 to separate out the MarkdownTextBlock anyway, as it has a lot of dependencies, so this could also contribute to that effort as well to remove the need for the dependency on Microsoft.Toolkit.Parsers.

If we do this swap, we should convert all of our existing Unit Tests on the Parser to instead test the Renderer and check the translation between the Markdown text scenario and the UI Element tree construction.

This may also just mean we can get rid of the Microsoft.Toolkit.Parsers package entirely if we find another open source C# based RSS parser as we don't use that elsewhere in the toolkit currently.

Requirements

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 26, 2020

Thanks for submitting a new feature request! I've automatically added a vote 👍 reaction to help get things started. Other community members can vote to help us prioritize this feature in the future!

@ghost ghost added in progress 🚧 for-review 📖 To evaluate and validate the Issues or PR Completed 🔥 labels Mar 26, 2020
@michael-hawker
Copy link
Member Author

@Kyaa-dost any ideas why the bot added these tags to this issue?

@michael-hawker michael-hawker removed Completed 🔥 for-review 📖 To evaluate and validate the Issues or PR in progress 🚧 labels Mar 26, 2020
@ghost ghost added in progress 🚧 for-review 📖 To evaluate and validate the Issues or PR Completed 🔥 and removed Completed 🔥 in progress 🚧 for-review 📖 To evaluate and validate the Issues or PR labels Mar 26, 2020
@Kyaa-dost
Copy link
Contributor

@michael-hawker I was doing testing with the bot so this have occurred due to that. I have scanned through all the features in the bot and none should be causing this.

This was referenced Mar 12, 2021
@michael-hawker michael-hawker added this to the future milestone Apr 29, 2021
@CommunityToolkit CommunityToolkit locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 29, 2022
@LalithaNadimpalli LalithaNadimpalli converted this issue into discussion #4663 Jul 29, 2022

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants