Support for Antora page-ids

[fritz-hh]

In the project I am currently involved in, we are considering moving from a "monolythic" documentation approach (i.e. documentation of several related products located in the same repository), to a decentralized documentation. In the new approach, we would use several git repositories in which there will be both source code and the corresponding documentation. Having code and doc together in the same repo should help us to keep source and doc in sync. Having several repositories, will help us to release the different products independently.
This decentralized documentation approach would be enabled by a new tool from the asciidoctor developpers: Antora. Antora (www.antora.org) a is tool that generates a documentation site from asciidoc documents located in several repositories.
In order to enable x-references between pages located on different sites, they have introduced a page identifier (see: https://docs.antora.org/antora/1.0/page/page-id/ ) that differ from the relative path we currently use in our x-refs.
I am currently trying to understand what implication that would have on the asciidoc-reference-check plugin. Did you already look at antora? What would be your thoughts about this?

[fritz-hh]

This is the answer of the antora développer to my question whether antora checks cross references:

"You have an excellent question. Currently, Antora is not reporting when an xref is broken. But I can assure you this is something we're going to be working on. We feel the need for it even when writing the Antora docs. Fortunately, Antora already knows when it's encountered a broken xref. It just reporting it yet. That's where https://gitlab.com/antora/antora/issues/145 comes in. The first part of that was adding a logger to Asciidoctor, which is now done. Next is to tie that into Antora. But validation is also a larger issue we're going to be taking very seriously"

[gaurav-nelson]

Thanks @fritz-hh I am aware of Antora, but still have not looked into it in details. Thank you for bringing this up. Our team is evaluating Antora as well, but I am not involved in that effort. But it does make sense to include those checks in here as well. I am not sure when I can try this.