Hello,
I've been using the Markdown exporter with complex SystemRDL files and have found that in some cases, a flat hierarchy is not desirable.
Having a nested hierarchy has the limitation that Markdown only supports one heading up to level 6.
Proposed Solution:
I've modified the exporter to support "Hierarchical" mode. In this mode:
-
Containers (MapAddr, FileReg, Memory): Headings (#) are still used, dynamically increasing the depth.
-
Records (Register): They are represented as list items (- Name) instead of headings.
-
Fields: They are represented as nested list items (- Name).
This approach preserves the document structure boundary (saving headings for the actual containers) and provides a clearer visual hierarchy. I propose adding a configuration option (e.g., style='hierarchy' vs style='flat') to the export method to support this new rendering style while maintaining backward compatibility.
Hello,
I've been using the Markdown exporter with complex SystemRDL files and have found that in some cases, a flat hierarchy is not desirable.
Having a nested hierarchy has the limitation that Markdown only supports one heading up to level 6.
Proposed Solution:
I've modified the exporter to support "Hierarchical" mode. In this mode:
Containers (MapAddr, FileReg, Memory): Headings (#) are still used, dynamically increasing the depth.
Records (Register): They are represented as list items (- Name) instead of headings.
Fields: They are represented as nested list items (- Name).
This approach preserves the document structure boundary (saving headings for the actual containers) and provides a clearer visual hierarchy. I propose adding a configuration option (e.g., style='hierarchy' vs style='flat') to the export method to support this new rendering style while maintaining backward compatibility.