support comark syntax for components

[rriemann]

What's the problem?

Hi!

The nuxt people behind mdc (markdown components) have decided to create https://github.com/comarkdown/comark to support other frameworks.

For use with custom components, this in my view more user-friendly than mdx. It also eases editing/preview on Github/Gitlab.

I try to convince the public sector to move to markdown based website systems and we need custom components. However, mdx is too complicated. This comark could be a middle ground.

What's the proposed solution?

Example of how components are defined in Comark (from their website):

# Regular Markdown

With a custom component:

::alert{type="warning"}
This is **Markdown** inside your own component.
::

Participation

• I am willing to submit a pull request for this feature.

[Princesseuh]

What would you expect Sätteri to be able to do with these? Just parse them as nodes for plugins and let plugins then handle them?

The syntax is essentially the same as directives, just with one less : (for both blocks and inline directives), so in essence the syntax is already somewhat supported and if you're not using comark for real, but just its syntax I'd suggest just using directives

[stephenlrandall]

@Princesseuh The main benefit of Comark's syntax is that nested directives (optionally) increase the : level, instead of decreasing it (https://comark.dev/syntax/components#nested). Anyone who's worked with directives for any amount of time will recognize that as something that's extremely user-friendly, although it does run counter to Markdown's code fence standard of incrementing markers on the outside:

```
I had to use 4 backticks to wrap this code.
```

I would love if the directive standard had bucked that convention, because things like...

:::::tabs
::::tab[Tab 1]
:::note
content
:::
::::
::::tab[Tab 2]
...
::::
:::::

...are genuinely really annoying to do. Why should all children care if one child has a child of its own? I would fully support Satteri following Comark's lead here, but it would be a break from remark-directive.

Otherwise, I've found their system of directives (https://comark.dev/syntax/components) to be a little overly complicated and probably too flexible. If you ever find yourself doing something like this, I think you've lost the plot somewhat.