15:36
@D.BenKnoble I don't think you've nailed the README yet: I skimmed the first 2/3 of the README and realised I had no idea what it did. I switched my brain on and re-read it, but I still found I had to think in order to figure out what the plugin does.
FWIW, I think wiki-md-core does a good better of explaining what it does than the README's What does it do? section
If I were re-writing it myself, I'd probably consider starting out with the sort of things it allows you to do (e.g. press gf on anything to jump to it) and then follow up with how it works: I think that the vast majority of Vim users don't even know that 'path' exists, let alone know the details of what it does or how it works.
I like to think that I'm a reasonably experienced user of Vim but nailing down the detailed functionality of 'path' in my brain and configuring it correctly in my setup is still on my TODO list
Maybe some examples of what the mysterious autoload functions you allude to can do might also be helpful?
As for the plugin itself, I haven't looked into it in detail yet, but it sounds pretty terrific! I already have a wiki setup in Vim using a very obscure not-a-plugin utility (soywiki), but if I didn't, I'd definitely try yours first
...and maybe will be compelled to switch over when I've read more of your plugin's :help!
The :help is explicit about how the new filetype works
When reading the README, again I had to think about it to figure out how it would work: you say that: a). there's a new filetype b). any file can be a wiki file c). the new filetype is added to existing filetypes...
...but I don't think that makes it clear that when you're viewing a file that both of the filetypes apply
...and if you're not already aware of Vim's support for typea.typeb filetypes, I think that section is pretty confusing
Again, I think the :help is much clearer
Actually... sorry, that info is included in the README... I just think that having it in the how to get started section leaves the what does it do section confusing
...hope this is the sort of feedback you were looking for and I'm not just being rude...
More nit-picky: you refer to yourself both in the third person ("the author") and in the first person. You should probably stick to one of these styles (and fwiw, I prefer the first person references)
...I think I see why you've used "the author" instead of "I" in that section, but I don't think it really works.
