feat: add option to include DOCX comments - #2322
Open
garlic9912 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Author
|
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this changes
This adds an
include_commentsoption for DOCX files:There is also a CLI flag:
Mammoth already knows how to convert Word comments, but it requires the following style-map rule:
So this PR mainly makes that existing behavior easier to discover and use.
Comments are still excluded by default because changing the default would change the output for existing users. Comments can also contain internal review notes and add quite a lot of extra text.
If the user provides a custom
style_map, it is kept and the comment rule is appended to it. User rules come first, so a customcomment-referencerule still takes priority.I kept Mammoth's existing comment links and backlinks instead of converting them to Markdown footnotes. Footnotes would need extra decisions around Markdown dialects, existing footnotes, repeated references, tables, and backlinks. That felt outside the scope of this change.
The tests cover:
MarkItDown;style_map;Closes #2275.