[GH-ISSUE #753] [New rule] Link can be simplified to autolink #527

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-03 01:27:42 +03:00 by kerem · 4 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:42 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @Marcono1234 on GitHub (Mar 21, 2023).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/DavidAnson/markdownlint/issues/753

Problem

Sometimes, maybe due to usage of graphical editors, users write overly verbose inline links and reference links where the link display text is the same as the link destination. For example:

[https://example.com/my-page](https://example.com/my-page)

[https://example.com/my-page][site]

[site]: https://example.com/my-page

Especially for complex URLs such Markdown code can be difficult to read, and it is error-prone in case only the display text is updated but the link destination is left unchanged and vice versa.

Suggested rule behavior

In these cases markdownlint should suggest usage of autolinks, e.g. <https://example.com/my-page>. Autolinks make it much easier to read the Markdown code.

Corner cases to consider:

The rule should only apply when the link target is actually a valid autolink (e.g. it should not apply for relative links)
Special escaping rules for autolinks have to be considered, or the rule should not apply when special escaping is needed to convert the link to an autolink (because that might defeat the point about being less error-prone)
The rule cannot apply when the link has additional data such as a hover title

Originally created by @Marcono1234 on GitHub (Mar 21, 2023). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/DavidAnson/markdownlint/issues/753 ### Problem Sometimes, maybe due to usage of graphical editors, users write overly verbose [inline links](https://spec.commonmark.org/0.30/#inline-link) and [reference links](https://spec.commonmark.org/0.30/#reference-link) where the link display text is the same as the link destination. For example: ```md [https://example.com/my-page](https://example.com/my-page) ``` ```md [https://example.com/my-page][site] [site]: https://example.com/my-page ``` Especially for complex URLs such Markdown code can be difficult to read, and it is error-prone in case only the display text is updated but the link destination is left unchanged and vice versa. ### Suggested rule behavior In these cases markdownlint should suggest usage of [autolinks](https://spec.commonmark.org/0.30/#autolink), e.g. `<https://example.com/my-page>`. Autolinks make it much easier to read the Markdown code. Corner cases to consider: - The rule should only apply when the link target is actually a valid autolink (e.g. it should not apply for relative links) - Special escaping rules for autolinks have to be considered, or the rule should not apply when special escaping is needed to convert the link to an autolink (because that might defeat the point about being less error-prone) - The rule cannot apply when the link has additional data such as a hover title

kerem

2026-03-03 01:27:42 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
fixed in next

new rule
labels

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@nschonni commented on GitHub (Mar 21, 2023):

Not entirely the same, but the conversion of text to auto links is already covered by md034 autofixing

@nschonni commented on GitHub (Mar 21, 2023): Not entirely the same, but the conversion of text to auto links is already covered by md034 autofixing

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@tommy-gilligan commented on GitHub (May 27, 2023):

Just for the sake of reference: this seems similar to #399

@tommy-gilligan commented on GitHub (May 27, 2023): Just for the sake of reference: this seems similar to #399

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@DavidAnson commented on GitHub (May 27, 2023):

Agreed!

@DavidAnson commented on GitHub (May 27, 2023): Agreed!

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@DavidAnson commented on GitHub (Nov 12, 2023):

Reopening this issue because #399 is fixed (in next branch), but does not include this behavior. I'm still thinking about whether it should or if this is something different.

@DavidAnson commented on GitHub (Nov 12, 2023): Reopening this issue because #399 is fixed (in `next` branch), but does not include this behavior. I'm still thinking about whether it should or if this is something different.

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-07 20:06:15 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #527] MD031: Make rule configurable with lines above/after like MD022 #2278