Few suggestions (i can try to do the PR if needed)

[littleski]

• (Description) Why not writing the type for each field, as well a props (FK, nullable, Unique, etc...) ? They are in the ERD, but the ERD doesn't embed the comments. Maybe having a config field top level or a specific markup per model to choose that ?
• Is there a way, when using multiple workspaces to only have a synthetic "version" of a table in a workspace. For example, i want to clearly see the relations with the "user" table, but i don't really care of the objects related in the "User" workspace, i just want to see the relations, each other workspace, the same way, will fully document their domain, but in theses erd, the table "user" will show a synthetic version ? (Ideally, Markdown links to the right domain position would be amazing)
• Is there a way to "Group" the workspace in the table of content ? or sort them alphabetically for instance, so it's easyer to find love when you have 20+ workspaces ?

❤️

[samchon]

1. It seems good suggestion
2. I'm not sure what you're talking about, is your idea not expressible with the existing @namespace, @erd and @describe?
3. It would better to support more configurable options in the prisma schema file (generator markdown { ... })

[samchon]

Welcome your PR.

[littleski]

Yeah. Haven't got many time lately, and encountered a few TS issues is the existing code. Have priorised putting all the doc for one project to have a good test base and be able to iterate. Found some issue in our schéma by doing so, business first. :) Le jeu. 8 févr. 2024 à 11:53, Jeongho Nam ***@***.***> a écrit :

…

Welcome your PR. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#20 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADSMGHL4IQ2UC4FIY5HRNQDYSSVBBAVCNFSM6AAAAABC2MQVQCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSMZTHAYTSMRTHE> . You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID: ***@***.***>