Tomas Doran bobtfish at
Mon Mar 3 16:11:13 EST 2008

On 29 Feb 2008, at 19:29, Yuri Takhteyev wrote:

>> Text::Markdown *does not* extend the original Markdown syntax *in

>> any

>> way*.


> Well, I don't know if agree with this reading.

Good! My original comments were somewhat deliberately inflamatory to
try and provoke discussion - which seems to have been a success! :)

> Text:Markdown just imports Text:MultiMarkdown and disables some

> features. While it might behave like the original markdown, it goes a

> long way in terms of blurring the boundary between Markdown and

> MultiMarkdown. And using it as a reference implementation would mean

> sending maintainers of other implementations hunting through

> MultiMarkdown code trying to figure out what features are "standard"

> and what features are "extra".

As noted in my original mail, I didn't in any way suggest that I
considered my code's time had come.

As yes - currently that way that this is implemented leaves *a lot*
to be desired.

Re-reading my original email - I didn't term this strongly enough:

> On 28 Feb 2008, at 17:34, Tomas Doran wrote:

>> I'd like to get to a point where I'm a little more happy with the

>> code, and then I'll start promoting this as a 'true' fork, or, if

>> I can get John to agree and approve - I'd like to become the

>> 'official' maintained version which is linked from daringfireball.


When I said 'a little more happy with the code', I meant 'un-fuck the
whole mess internally' ;_)

However, from an *external* perspective, I believe that my code is
very useable, and has solved more nasty / edge cases than either or

I wasn't, however - prepared to spend my effort maintaining 2
different implementations by copy-pasting code between them, that
just sucks :)


More information about the Markdown-Discuss mailing list