Files
vimwiki/doc/2023-03-23-file-link-resolution.wiki
T
Brennen Bearnes 5fdf73f61d WIP: document link resolution behavior and design decisions
This commit is starting as attempt to add useful context for link functions
in the comments / docstrings, and clean up a few things for better
readability.  This is preliminary work for a solution to:

https://github.com/vimwiki/vimwiki/issues/1271

...which is gradually becoming a description of everything that's wrong
with how VimWiki links to files, more or less.

It includes a decision document, which should become a full description
of the problem and steps taken.

This commit _will_ be rewritten.

Bug: #1271
2023-03-27 10:57:28 -06:00

172 lines
5.5 KiB
Plaintext

= Contents =
- [[#VimWiki file link resolution]]
- [[#context]]
- [[#possible solutions]]
- [[#revert to original behavior]]
- [[#check if a file exists on disk when following link]]
- [[#add a link scheme that means "open in vim"]]
- [[#add a configuration toggle for opening file: links in vim]]
- [[#add configuration for a set of filetypes to open in vim]]
- [[#open questions]]
= VimWiki file link resolution =
A decision document started by Brennen Bearnes on 2023-03-23.
== context ==
https://github.com/vimwiki/vimwiki/issues/950
https://github.com/vimwiki/vimwiki/commit/d7ec12645a0460a7d200279c52915e6e080e9869
Commit d7ec126 applies the wiki extension to files containing a `.`, thus
allowing page names to contain a literal period. This is correct behavior,
insofar as pages like `Franklin D. Roosevelt` should be able to exist and get
mapped to e.g. `Franklin D. Roosevelt.wiki`.
Unfortunately, this broke behavior that a number of users rely on:
https://github.com/vimwiki/vimwiki/issues/1271
I have some latex files stored and linked to in my wiki.
Before d7ec126 I could omit the file: part of a link to have vim open the file
directly.
After d7ec126 vimwiki adds a `md` extension when opening any file which
results in a `filename.tex.md` being created alongside the original tex
file. Using `file:` is not a solution since this can only be configured to
open a second instance of vim.
It makes sense that this is useful.
Sidebar: `file:` _can_ be configured to do just about anything with a custom
handler, but that doesn't mean it's a very good user experience.
= possible solutions =
== revert to original behavior ==
As a default, I personally think this is a non-starter. Not being able to use
`.` in page names is broken. I also suspect other things break if you treat
those files as wiki pages.
We could make it configurable, though.
*Pro:*
- People can go back to their expected behavior by setting one config
variable.
*Con:*
- Adds an extra branch to link handling code.
- I haven't thought through the implications of treating it as fully
supported behavior. What else will people expect to work right?
== check if a file exists on disk when following link ==
The idea is that if a link is `[[foo.txt]]` and `foo.txt` already exists, we
should edit the existing file instead of creating a `foo.txt.md`.
*Pro:*
- Might be the closest to expectations of people who rely on the old
behavior.
- Doesn't expand the language itself.
*Con:*
- Complicates link handling code.
- Parsing a page requires knowing about external files.
- Might be surprising / confusing. You can write `foo.txt` and wind up with
two different outcomes depending on whether `foo.txt` already exists.
- It's very Do What I Mean, which isn't necessarily bad. But if I write a
link to `foo.txt` and wind up at `foo.txt.md`, it's not obvious that's
what I meant.
== add a link scheme that means "open in vim" ==
Something like `[[edit:foo.txt]]`.
I vaguely think there's prior art for this in some older browsers? I could
swear Lynx had something like it, although I couldn't find anything under:
- [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_URI_schemes|wp:List of URI schemes]]
- [[https://lynx.invisible-island.net/lynx_help/lynx_url_support.html|list of Lynx URL schemes]].
I may just be thinking of `lynxexec:`.
*Pro:*
- People want this anyway, and a `VimwikiLinkHandler()` for using `file:` or
some custom prefix to handle it is a common tweak to configurations which
we already document.
- It doesn't need a file existence check.
*Con:*
- Expands the language.
- How is this converted to HTML?
- What will Markdown parsers do with it?
- Right now there are at least 3 high-level paths for opening a link:
- Open in VimWiki
- Hand off to custom link handler
- Open with `vimwiki#base#system_open_link()`
- ...this would introduce a 4th.
- Unless there is prior art, this would be something that _looks_ like a
URL/URI, but isn't recognized outside the wiki. That seems fine for
custom prefixes, but is it ok to introduce here?
== add a configuration toggle for opening file: links in vim ==
Add a boolean that says "just open `file:` and `local:` links in the editor".
*Pro:*
- Probably a relatively simple change.
- Might meet some users' needs.
*Con:*
- Loses the utility in linking to binary filetypes which are best opened via
the system handler (images, PDFs, etc.).
- Users are explicitly already relying on `file:` links to be distinct from
`[[file.foo]]` links.
== add configuration for a set of filetypes to open in vim ==
A variation on the toggle for `file:` links would be to allow configuring a
_list_ of file extensions which should be opened with Vim rather than passed on
to the system handler.
Something like:
{{{vim
let wiki.file_link_edit_ext = ['txt', 'csv']
}}}
*Pro:*
- Doesn't expand the language.
- Doesn't have any implications for HTML rendering.
- A lot of `VimwikiLinkHandler()` boilerplate that is just used for making
links open in Vim could go away.
- I have this in my own config, so it's an appealing feature.
*Con:*
- Does require people to rewrite existing link collections, but that's
true of other solutions as well.
*Unanswered:*
- Would there be any sensible default for this besides an empty list?
My guess is not.
= open questions =
- What is the actual current behavior with Markdown?
- Does it differ meaningfully from vimwiki syntax?
- If so, why?