-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
Search: index definition lists as sections #9571
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
Comments
Adding this to the roadmap, the big goal here is removing Fjson parsing, and standardizing Sphinx search indexing |
The code that decides which parser to use is related to the readthedocs.org/readthedocs/projects/models.py Lines 1431 to 1450 in bf128c7
By enabling On the other hand, relying on the Besides, with the idea proposed by @stsewd in the description, we can stop creating |
This would be a pretty huge win, if we can do it easily. They take up a ton of room in the DB, for minimal value, I think. |
Adding this to @benjaoming for next sprint, since you've shown some interest in search stuff 👍 |
The test input readthedocs.org/readthedocs/search/tests/data/sphinx/in/page.html Lines 106 to 143 in a4fdd6b
|
Currently, we index
h
tags as sections for all doc types, but for sphinx we additionally index domains inSphinxDomain
objects (aka roles).Domains/roles are just like sections, they have a title, content, and they allow you to link to them with an anchor.
And sphinx/docutils renders them as a definition list.
So, I think it makes sense to index definition lists as sections for all doctools (or at least the definitions that can be linked),
for sphinx projects we will keep indexing domains/roles on their own, so they will keep the current behavior (but kind of like the idea of not having domains/roles at all, since they are specific to sphinx).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: