I share your comment on tooling. At my former job we developed a documentation portal with Antora and AsciiDoc https://antora.org/ . I say developed rather than deployed as we ended up adding a ton of extra features to Antora (think authentication, authorizations, image previews, full-text search as you type, etc.).
Antora is quite nice and writing documentation in AsciiDoc was very enjoyable, but it was very clear how the JS implementation of AsciiDoctor was not on par with the Ruby one. We had multiple cases where the JS version would handle documents differently, or support a different feature set than the asciidoctor-cli. Moreover, the build times for the portal were extremely long (like 20-30 minutes for ~100 pages)
To write documents we all used VS Code + the Firefox/Chrome ASciDoctor preview plugin, and that worked much better than AsciiDocFx.
Going back I would probably suggest to look into other platforms, as the benefits of AsciiDoc are smaller than the amount of tooling frustrations.
Antora is quite nice and writing documentation in AsciiDoc was very enjoyable, but it was very clear how the JS implementation of AsciiDoctor was not on par with the Ruby one. We had multiple cases where the JS version would handle documents differently, or support a different feature set than the asciidoctor-cli. Moreover, the build times for the portal were extremely long (like 20-30 minutes for ~100 pages)
To write documents we all used VS Code + the Firefox/Chrome ASciDoctor preview plugin, and that worked much better than AsciiDocFx.
Going back I would probably suggest to look into other platforms, as the benefits of AsciiDoc are smaller than the amount of tooling frustrations.