Add webc syntax highlighting to GitHub by default
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- JavaScript
- Stars
- 1.4k
- Forks
- 46
- Avg merge
- 10m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
Hello!
On a project I'm working on, I want syntax highlighting for .webc components on GitHub, and so I'm using the .gitattributes workaround to get GitHub highlight appropriately.
.gitattributes
*.webc linguist-language=HTML
This works well enough, but it's something we could make work by default!
If we wanted to add this, it looks like we could open a PR to the linguist repo to add .webc as a recognized-by-default extension. We could map .webc to HTML, like the .gitattributes workaround does now.
https://github.com/github-linguist/linguist/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#adding-an-extension-to-a-language
Open questions
- Can we prove that at least 200 unique
:user/:reporepositories? That's one of their requirements (I think so!) - What are some good code examples of
.webc? They ask for some real-world examples. - Do we have a "TextMate-compatible grammar" for webc already? If not, I wonder how hard that would be to make? That would help with highlighting in the situations where webc and html don't match perfectly (as opposed to just using HTML directly).
- In the meantime, can/should we add the
.gitattributesworkaround to the documentation site? What would be a good page to add that to?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the linked Linguist CONTRIBUTING.md guidance and the existing .gitattributes workaround. Verify the 200-repository requirement, collect real-world .webc examples, and check whether a TextMate-compatible grammar exists; done means a concrete Linguist submission plan and a decided documentation location for the workaround.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- github, html, javascript
- Domain
- documentation, tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100