Idea: change quoting method

[phildenhoff]

Not an issue so much as a discussion topic. I'm wondering what your thoughts are on (optionally?) changing the way highlights & annotations are decorated.

Right now, quoting works like this:

Types of notes

- 📌 **highlight**
- 📝
  - **annotation** - if under an highlight
  - **reply** - if a child
  - **page note** - if not a child
- 🗑️ *deleted* note

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of that — since highlights are text quotes, I'd like to render them as Logseq quotes using the > character. Also, since my annotations are really notes, I don't want them decorated with an emoji at all

In summary, I'd like this:

Instead of this:

What do you think about that? I've already done this work on my fork, in a branch and I'll continue using that method, but right now it's tied into some changes with how the menu is rendered, which I'd like to make sure we get back into your mainline.

[c6p]

Hey @phildenhoff,

Thanks for all the work.

Please check out my review on your fork. I want to provide a more general form of templating, then we may have your decorations as one example of possible customizations.

For other changes, please submit them as PRs.

Cheers

[phildenhoff]

Thanks for taking a look at it — do you have idea on how you'd like to provide the formatting? I can see that quickly becoming a complicated feature (and not something I'd want to implement without a plan)

[c6p]

What I have in mind is actually quite simple. Just letting user set a custom format for each of the 5 annotation types, maybe kept in a annotationFormat setting. For example:

📌 {{highlight}}
📝 {{annotation}}
📝 {{reply}}
📝 {{pageNote}}
🗑️ {{deleted}}

I'm not exactly sure on {{. For your case:

> {{highlight}}
{{annotation}}
{{reply}}
{{pageNote}}
🗑️ {{deleted}}

Or something similar. It should be enough for most use cases.

[c6p]

I've moved all under the settings menu. Check out v0.2.3 and README.md.

Cheers

[phildenhoff]

That works great, thank you!!