FR: Support `org-mode` files

[Dietr1ch]

Is your feature request related to a particular use-case?

I keep docs in org-mode files instead of markdown.
Currently it seems the file specified in Cargo.toml is blindly parsed as a markdown file.

Describe the solution you'd like to implement/see implemented

• All org-mode files in the project should be spellchecked.
• When setting package.readme = "some_file.org" in Cargo.toml the file should be parsed as an org-mode file.

Describe alternatives you've considered

At least skipping .org files with a warning instead of pretending they are markdown and failing might be nicer. I'm using --skip-readme for now, but it results in a spellchecking coverage gap.

[drahnr]

Can you provide a link to an "org-mode" parser?

[Dietr1ch]

There's a few in crates.io/. I''m using orgize on a personal project, but there's a few more.

The state of them might all be around experimental/beta, but honestly that doesn't mean they are useless, since org-mode isn't that simple to parse, and only in recent years efforts of formally defining it have emerged, but most documents are going to be simple enough that any parser worth publishing to crates.io should do a good enough job.

---

Also, I tools like pandoc can convert between a bunch of formats, but I don't know if they generate a range mapping. If so maybe converting to markdown, spellchecking, and then projecting the errors back using the range mapping would allow to spellcheck a lot of formats, but this is more of a random idea that could also work, but I have no clue on how feasible it is. From skimming pandoc's user guide generating a range mapping for a conversion isn't featured.

[drahnr]

There's a few in crates.io/. I''m using orgize on a personal project, but there's a few more.

Looking at this, I'd go for https://code.fizz.buzz/talexander/organic , but I won't have time anytime soon (as in 2028~ish) to add this feature. Happy to review a PR though.

Also, I tools like pandoc can convert between a bunch of formats, but I don't know if they generate a range mapping. If so maybe converting to markdown, spellchecking, and then projecting the errors back using the range mapping would allow to spellcheck a lot of formats, but this is more of a random idea that could also work, but I have no clue on how feasible it is. From skimming pandoc's user guide generating a range mapping for a conversion isn't featured.

That's what's already done, but every mapping layer comes with caveats. Requiring an external tool is not something I want to add to cargo-spellcheck ever.

[Dietr1ch]

No hurries, just wanted to file an issue to acknowledge it and verify I'm just not doing something wrong. I might take a stab at it later™, but misspellings are a lower tier concern in my toy rust projects that still don't do what they are supposed to do.

---

That's what's already done, but every mapping layer comes with caveats. Requiring an external tool is not something I want to add to cargo-spellcheck ever.

Yeah, and it really seems that they don't offer such mapping in the first place, it was just a wild idea to try to cover many text formats in one go.