Square brackets & common inlines (was: [this] as a synonym for [this][])

[Jelks Cabaniss]

Rad Geek wrote:
>>> For that matter, I think square brackets with other operators could
>>> be used to advantage for a number of inline elements...
>>> 
>>> 	[-del-] [+add+] ["cite"] [~span~]
 
> What advantage does writing `[-text to be deleted-] [+text to be
> inserted+]` really have over writing `<del>text to be deleted</del>
> <ins>text to be inserted</ins>`? 

1.  Syntax consistency with other possible inlines-as-text
2.  No start-tag/end-tag *ML, easier to type

The other inlines I mentioned -- probably including even `sub` -- are
granted far more common than `add` and `ins`.  `span`, of course, is the
most common.  The question with `span` -- since 99% of the time it will have
`id` or `class` attributes -- is whether something like

	[~{#foo}some span of text~]

is a suitable text version of

	<span id="foo">some span of text</span>

inside *text*.  To me, the answer is "it might be".  True, you're unlikely
to find that in common emails, but there IS no general way of expressing
such in common emails -- at least that I can think of.  It's easier to type
than the *ML markup (IMHO), and when someone is *authoring* explicitly in
Markdown, it might be nice to have a convenient shorthand for the common
inlines.

There is another aspect.  See my comment last month about "assuming `code`
inside `pre`" [1], and note that Markdown has a syntax for `code`, but none
for `cite`.  Now I'm certainly not dissing "code" at all (hey, I've used
backticks HOW many times in this very email? ;), far from it; but consider
how much a non-IT-related thesis, dissertation, book, etc. would contain
code/markup examples vs. citations -- there'd be probably *zero* usage of
`code`.  Currently Markdown is heavily weighted towards code and
markup-related writing -- nothing wrong with that; I merely think that
Markdown is awesome enough to be made general-purpose enough for a wider
audience.  (Alternatively: nothing wrong with Markdown as
"Text-Docbook-SuperLite", but why not round it out a bit with
"Text-TEI-SuperLite"? ;)

[1]: http://tinyurl.com/3qp6j

Back to the "span", etc. comments above -- I suppose the two really big
questions are a) whether to have text versions of the common HTML inlines,
and b) whether adding `class`, `id` (and `title`???) attributes to those --
as well as the existing `em`, `strong` and `code` inlines -- is appropriate
for Markdown.

Food for thought, anyway ...

/Jelks