Obsidian publish: support of plugins (at least the one that affect rendering)

Use case or problem

  1. Install plugins from Obsidian plugin repository for desktop
  2. Full support of plugins in obsidian publish

Proposed solution

Develop the functionality for Obsidian publish.

Current workaround (optional)



  1. Unification of software across the desktop, mobile, web
  2. More revenue from Obsidian publish purchased
  3. Huge advantage (if the plugins are working) from 3-party solutions of web-hostings or another free “Obsidian publish” alternatives
  4. Use don’t need to spend huge amount of time rewriting (for example Dataview queries into normal markdown tables)

I guess it’s easier said than done but I fully support this. And queries, too.


Some plugins have nothing do to with publish. It would be better to rewrite this FR by limiting it to the plugins that effect the way a document is previewed.

1 Like


I’ve been playing around with Obsidian for some weeks now, and since a couple of days I bough Publish service, so I’m quite new to both Obsidian and Publish worlds…
I would like to follow the advice of @WhiteNoise and point out the first problems I’m facing with third-party plugins. I use extensively Dataview plugin, basically for “auto-indexing” my folders, and it doesn’t work at all. The only thing I see in my Publish garden is the Dataview query code.

Hope this helps Devs to trace a Roadmap for supporting (at least) the most downloaded/used Plugins.


If we could at least get embedded search (query) blocks, that would personally be a big win, and since that’s a longstanding core plugin it feels like it shouldn’t be unreasonable to see it supported in Publish.


Yes I was surprised to see that queries were not supported in Publish.

1 Like

I would also like to see dataview work with publish. As an alternate I was just about to try embedded queries, and now I see that these are not supported either. Since publish is the most expensive Obsidian product, I really hope that something becomes available that can easily “list” an automatic aggretate of files (rule-based lists) without users having to maintain two sets of files as we do now: those for use in everything but publish, and another set for publish.


PUBLISH needs dataview! YESSSSS, please integrate it! I WON’T PUBLISH WITHOUT IT!


:slight_smile: commenting again


Still here


@bas1 I’m not sure how berating the devs with entitled demands is going to motivate them to prioritize your pet feature request. If obsidian publish isn’t doing what you want you might use the search feature and find some alternatives.

Hello, did any of you find out a workaround for using plugins with Obsidian publish yet? If not, do we know if this is going to be implemented anytime soon? Thanks :slight_smile:


Obsidian Publish is useless if the rendering is different from the Obsidian Desktop experience. Full Stop.

Are you even an Obsidian publish customer? I am. It is not useless. Full stop.

Did you get your VIP badge by second guessing other people’s posts and questionning their good faith? #troll

Use case or problem

The dataview plugin is very powerful and practical, so every obsidian note of mine contains dataview code content, but unfortunately, the current publishing function does not support dataview, and can only display a bunch of useless source code.

Proposed solution

Will the publishing function support dataview in the future? If it is really impossible to support dataview, can you at least block the code content of dataview from being displayed in the published results, so that the display of notes can be viewed more neatly.

Current workaround (optional)

Related feature requests (optional)


@WhiteNoise Some response? The threat was open in 2021…

No. As usual, what is committed to happen is in the roadmap.

I was thinking you are not solving it because it is problem that Obsidian’s server need to make execution of Javascript? So it will be very resource demanding and cause more cost on your side?

We generally do not comment on the priority or feasibility of FRs (and I have always regretted when I did).