refactor: make each little thing a linkable heading

[uncenter]

• keymap.toml
• yazi.toml
• theme.toml
• Add section explaining the usage of the below content... e.g. for keymap.toml:

There are x "sections" of the keymap.toml file: manager, tasks... TOML stuff... keymap = [ { ... } ].

[sxyazi]

I like the new way of creating anchors for each command. What do you think about placing [manager] and [tasks] in different files so that we can still maintain classification by command type?

As for tables, it has some limitations and may prevent the representation of complex structures, such as the parameters of the sort command. Ideally, we should avoid having both lists and tables to keep consistency in content.

[uncenter]

I'm not sure of further separating the pages is a good idea. I've also been thinking about how to maintain that classification and I'm not entirely sure! My feeling is that if they all go under one [section], they shouldn't need further distinction. Maybe we could use more sections/TOML tables?

[sxyazi]

Yeah this is the worst result I had considered to do that. But without sub-categories, we would lose the ability to group similar commands/options together for presentation, something like https://yazi-rs.github.io/docs/configuration/yazi#ueberzug-specific - although it is options rather than commands.

How do you feel about keeping the original format and creating a separate anchor for each command? For example:

<anchor>`escape`</anchor>: Cancel find, exit visual mode, clear selected, cancel filter, or cancel search.

where the anchor component generates a link that can be referenced automatically, such as #manager-escape.

[uncenter]

We could just do a fourth level of headings?

[uncenter]

I think this looks great. The question still remains of how/if we want to maintain the organization / grouping of options within a section... I'm at a loss here.

[sxyazi]

The current issue is not about grouping but about the table.

I just feel that having groups would be better, but I'm not sure if this feeling is suitable - it looks good now, at least better than before, since we can clearly link to a specific command through anchors.

[sxyazi]

For example the rename command, it doesn't seem easy to express through a table:

[sxyazi]

Maybe we can merge it first?

[uncenter]

Sorry what do you mean? Merge the conflicts?

[sxyazi]

I'll merge it after resolving the conflict, but first with your approval and change it from draft status to mergeable (it feels weird to merge a draft lol)

[uncenter]

Well we probably should deal with the conflicts next, and I should turn the other two pages into tables... then it would be good to merge IMO.

[sxyazi]

Don't turn them into tables yet, I might convert them back to the lists, still need to think about it some more...

[uncenter]

Then we shouldn't merge this yet ahah.

[sxyazi]

That would make conflicts more difficult to address, and I really like the new anchor thing. I hope to see it become a reality soon😆

[uncenter]

Alright, would you like to merge the conflicts? I always mess it up.

[sxyazi]

Sure

[sxyazi]

I think I've resolved all the conflicts. Would you like to give it a review?

[uncenter]

In the future you can add the suggestions to a batch and commit them all at once :)

[sxyazi]

Yeah totally, I forgot about it ahah

[sxyazi]

Thank you, merged!