Link concealing [feature request]

[Ginner]

Hi Sidney!

First off, thank you for a great plugin. I've been using it for a little while.
In the documentation it says that it is not a 'syntax plugin', so I've been using the, also great, vim-pandoc-syntax as a stand-alone syntax plugin.

However, it seems that your plugin is actually a pretty good syntax-plugin as well. The only thing I'm missing after turning off vim-pandoc-syntax is concealing urls. E.g.:
[something](long-url-to-something.com) becomes something (but underlined).

I'd love to see it implemented. What are your thoughts on that?

Again, thank you.

[SidOfc]

Hey @Ginner!

I remember you also sent a PR to fix a typo in the README, glad to see you're happy still :)
As for mkdx not being a syntax plugin, indeed I did not intend for it to be one so even to this day, it only "appends" syntax so that it can be used with an existing markdown highlighter (mainly the default one, but other syntax-only markdown plugins should work as well).

Even the appended syntax isn't written by me but mostly copied over from people who understand far more about how to do these kinds of things (though I do patch / tweak some small things sometimes). That said I don't think it would hurt to add this as an "opt-in" feature.

That means I would add a new setting to mkdx which would allow you to conceal links. For inspiration I could look at what vim-pandoc-syntax does and perhaps copy it into the syntax file + give them credits for actually writing it.

I'll have to do some research to see if it would break other features (since now you can remove links by pressing prefixln which relies on syntax highlighting).

I'll look into it, thanks for the suggestion 👍

[SidOfc]

Hi @Ginner,

Worked on it a little bit, I doubt a flag will even be needed because if a user actually sets conceallevel it means they likely want to just conceal the text anyway. I'd love to hear any thoughts about wether mkdx should allow this being optional even when conceallevel is set though, feel free to comment.

Also, you mentioned it just showing the text, does that mean vim-pandoc-syntax also hides the surrounding [ and ] marks?

In any case it's in master and you can give it a try to see if it works correctly for you :)

[Ginner]

Wow, you're effective!

I think you're right in your assumption, that users enabling concealment will want the feature on. At least I do ;)

No, you're right, vim-pandoc-syntax leaves the square brackets, which I find preferable. sorry for that.

I've tried it and it works perfectly! Thank you so much :)

[SidOfc]

Haha cheers for the compliment :)

And no problem either, good to know vim-pandoc-syntax leaves them too :)
Should issues pop up with it feel free to reopen!

In the meantime, enjoy the feature, and closing :)