s or s ? Message-ID: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> >From http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html: > Note that Markdown formatting syntax is not processed within block-level > HTML tags. E.g., you can?t use Markdown-style *emphasis* inside an > HTML block. [...] Unlike block-level HTML tags, Markdown syntax is > processed within span-level tags. How do people work around this when they want to apply Markdown to text in table elements, or to text in divs? For example, in a basic page with a grid layout, one would want to use markdown in the navigation

as well, say for a list of links. Seems like a pretty serious limitation. Thanks, Dan From mail at milianw.de Thu Apr 23 07:23:48 2009 From: mail at milianw.de (Milian Wolff) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:23:48 +0200 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200904231323.49345.mail@milianw.de> On Thursday 23 April 2009, Dan Dascalescu wrote: > From http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html: > > Note that Markdown formatting syntax is not processed within block-level > > HTML tags. E.g., you can?t use Markdown-style *emphasis* inside an > > HTML block. [...] Unlike block-level HTML tags, Markdown syntax is > > processed within span-level tags. > > How do people work around this when they want to apply Markdown to > text in table elements, or to text in divs? For example, in a basic > page with a grid layout, one would want to use markdown in the > navigation

as well, say for a list of links. Seems like a pretty > serious limitation. There are extensions to the blank Markdown specification, for example PHP Markdown Extra supports something like the following:

Here comes more markdown! * list * foobar

-- Milian Wolff mail at milianw.de http://milianw.de -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. Url : From sgbotsford at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 09:07:15 2009 From: sgbotsford at gmail.com (Sherwood Botsford) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:07:15 -0600 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> Multimarkdown has a pretty good syntax for tables. In general it has the following bug which may be a feature:

is considered a tag but

is not. The latter is rendered as

which breaks the xhtml spec but which is rendered properly on every browser I've checked. There is also a flag inside multimarkdown that can be set to work inside what it considers block level tags. I ended up setting this, and forgetting it. I've been making the argument that div, html, and body (others?) are NOT block tags, but structural tags, and should be ignored. I took a look at the code to see if I could hack it to do this. Markdown has some heavy regexes. Not trivial. On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Dan Dascalescu wrote: > From http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html: > >> Note that Markdown formatting syntax is not processed within block-level >> HTML tags. E.g., you can?t use Markdown-style *emphasis* inside an >> HTML block. [...] Unlike block-level HTML tags, Markdown syntax is >> processed within span-level tags. > > How do people work around this when they want to apply Markdown to > text in table elements, or to text in divs? For example, in a basic > page with a grid layout, one would want to use markdown in the > navigation

as well, say for a list of links. Seems like a pretty > serious limitation. > > Thanks, > Dan > _______________________________________________ > Markdown-Discuss mailing list > Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss > -- Sherwood Botsford Sherwood's Forests Warburg, Alberta T0C 2T0 http://www.sherwoods-forests.com 780-848-2548 From ddascalescu+markdown at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 15:15:51 2009 From: ddascalescu+markdown at gmail.com (Dan Dascalescu) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:15:51 -0700 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 06:07, Sherwood Botsford wrote: > There is also a flag inside multimarkdown that can be set to work > inside what it considers block level tags. ?I ended up setting this, > and forgetting it. The reason I initially asked this was because I've seen MojoMojo-powered sites doing Markdown in divs just fine (e.g. http://formfu.org). It turns out that indeed MojoMojo uses Multimarkdown with the markdown_in_html_blocks flag set to true[^mm]. What surprises me is the rationale of disabling Markdown processing in

s. [^mm]: http://github.com/marcusramberg/mojomojo/blob/477908cf0de52a8a4dcf58887363a70f315731f9/lib/MojoMojo/Formatter/Markdown.pm Dan From waylan at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 15:36:14 2009 From: waylan at gmail.com (Waylan Limberg) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:36:14 -0400 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Dan Dascalescu wrote: > What surprises me is the rationale of disabling Markdown processing in >

s. Go re-read the first three paragraphs of the docs on inline html [1]. Processing markdown within divs just doesn't fit in with the purpose of markdown as stated there (i.e.: writing format v. publishing format). The fact is, a div, although meaningless in itself, is for publishing purposes. Therefore, if you really want it, markdown allows it - but your on you own. In other words, you have to write all the html inside it as well. Makes sense to me. [1]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html -- ---- \X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\| Waylan Limberg From ddascalescu+markdown at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 16:09:17 2009 From: ddascalescu+markdown at gmail.com (Dan Dascalescu) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:09:17 -0700 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com> > Go re-read the first three paragraphs of the docs on inline html [1]. > Processing markdown within divs just doesn't fit in with the purpose > of markdown as stated there (i.e.: writing format v. publishing > format). The fact is, a div, although meaningless in itself, is for > publishing purposes. Indeed, just like CSS is for presentation and even progressive MultiMarkdown only allows a small subset of it: [image]: http://path.to/image "Image title" width=40px height=400px style="border 1px black solid"; But I must ask: >From a utilitarian standpoint, does it benefit anyone that Markdown doesn't parse markup inside divs? Dan From orc at pell.chi.il.us Thu Apr 23 16:58:20 2009 From: orc at pell.chi.il.us (david parsons) Date: 23 Apr 2009 20:58:20 GMT Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: In article <3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af at mail.gmail.com>, Dan Dascalescu wrote: >From a utilitarian standpoint, does it benefit anyone that Markdown >doesn't parse markup inside divs? It makes the syntax a little bit clearer not to have that special case, and it may stop some screamingly horrible parser edgecases. Quite a few markdown implementations have extensions to do markupable divisions. None of them are very pretty, and that might be enough to keep them out of The Standard(tm). >%class:name% >I do them as quoted blocks with a magic header. It works, >but it's not going to win any awards for clarity. -david parsons From sgbotsford at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 17:01:32 2009 From: sgbotsford at gmail.com (Sherwood Botsford) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:01:32 -0600 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: <3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com> References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71@mail.gmail.com> Here's an example of why I set the flag off For my blog ### 5 April ## Greenhouse hot Last night I plugged in the electric heater for the greenhouse, and started doing the cleanup. Today everything that has true leaves on it moves out of the dining room and into the green house. I've got 6 weeks to get these plants ready for the first farmer's market. Not sure if I'm going to make it.

![My front yard -- Pines in winter](/Images/whatsnew-2009/Pines-in-winter-2009-04-05_13-56-13.jpeg) Maybe I'm jumping the gun just a bit. This part of the yard doesn't look much like spring. ***

So in general I have Main flow of text

Picture reference Caption text ruler line

more main flow class=pic floats left, and is 40% of the width of the parent. class=picr floats right, and is 40% of the width of the parent. This gives me a layout that works on pretty much everything from an iPhone to a 21" display. Now, postulate that I wanted to completely divorce the layout from the content: How would I do it? Blog day: include start_page. include main_flow_1

include pic1

include main_flow_2

include pic2

include main_flow_3 include end_page Yikes. Every photo I want to include will usually require an additional two files. Markdown was intended to reduce the amount of time we spent chasing tags, and to be easy to write, edit and read in plain form as well as published form. But layout is messier than email, and as soon as you get to *anything* that you don't want to run in a fixed width column, it starts getting creaky. I'm sure there are situations where you DONT want markdown to process what is inside block tags -- mostly stuff talking about markdown, near as I can figure, but I bet the number of people who actually need "ignore contents of block tags" are a small minority. Now if I could just figure out how to keep markdown from wrapping block tags in

's From ddascalescu+markdown at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 17:37:33 2009 From: ddascalescu+markdown at gmail.com (Dan Dascalescu) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:37:33 -0700 Subject: No Markdown in

s or

s ? In-Reply-To: <534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71@mail.gmail.com> References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> <534004cc0904230607m1053484cy93786a4adf9ec273@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231215o3daf8426o5a63c227b8b092e5@mail.gmail.com> <3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com> <534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3561cc6d0904231437s5c7f1bcep6f1c33a8685ac094@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 14:01, Sherwood Botsford wrote: > Here's an example of why I set the flag off This flag was...? I gather the entire post was good advocacy for setting markdown_in_html_blocks => 1 > I'm sure there are situations where you DONT want markdown to process > what is inside block tags -- mostly stuff talking about markdown, near > as I can figure, That should go in a

, and indeed  blocks should be
holy and untouched, for they can contain random stuff from whatever
programming language that would confuse Markdown.

> but I bet the number of people who actually need
> "ignore contents of block tags" are a small minority.

Completely agree with that. s don't mean anything. Why should
they mean something to Markdown?

> Now if I could just figure out how to keep markdown from wrapping
> block tags in 's

GitHub encountered the same problem and came up with
http://github.github.com/github-flavored-markdown/

Dan

From orc at pell.chi.il.us  Fri Apr 24 01:23:28 2009
From: orc at pell.chi.il.us (david parsons)
Date: 24 Apr 2009 05:23:28 GMT
Subject: No Markdown in 
s or

s ?
References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com>

	<3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com>
	<534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 

In article <534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71 at mail.gmail.com>,
Sherwood Botsford   wrote:

>I'm sure there are situations where you DONT want markdown to process
>what is inside block tags

   In my case, the situations are pretty near all of them.   I've tossed
   some extensions into discount so I can wedge  and  into
   the text without actually having to write them, so the only reason I
   use vanilla html is when I'm adding snippets of html from external
   sources (like bikely route html, statcounter poop, or railroa
   timetables) where I do not want to have them marked up.

   Doing something like

   >%class:pic%
   > [... all of the picture goop ...]

   (or however the other markdown implementations do their style hacks)
   has the decided advantage that even though it does require that you
   know about the styles you don't have to go back to html block
   matching; markdown already has a "you're in this block until you fall
   off the end" way of doing things, and (at least as far as I'm
   concerned) it's a better bet to try and follow that than to twine
   html more intimately than it already is.

   -david parsons

From ddascalescu at gmail.com  Fri Apr 24 01:49:22 2009
From: ddascalescu at gmail.com (Dan Dascalescu)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:49:22 -0700
Subject: No Markdown in s or

s ?
In-Reply-To: 
References: <3561cc6d0904230415t702f9503j223d7fabc361c563@mail.gmail.com> 

	<3561cc6d0904231309q585644aj4e3ae5321b2443af@mail.gmail.com> 
	<534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71@mail.gmail.com> 

Message-ID: <3561cc6d0904232249x64ecc1cdo4fc47e651300d355@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 22:23, david parsons  wrote:
> In article <534004cc0904231401m3ae87c98r3ed863192b678d71 at mail.gmail.com>,
> Sherwood Botsford ? wrote:
>
>>I'm sure there are situations where you DONT want markdown to process
>>what is inside block tags
>
> ? In my case, the situations are pretty near all of them. ? I've tossed
> ? some extensions into discount so I can wedge  and  into
> ? the text without actually having to write them, so the only reason I
> ? use vanilla html is when I'm adding snippets of html from external
> ? sources

That's a very good point. I wrote up a summary of the whole discussion at
http://github.com/marcusramberg/mojomojo/issues#issue/16

IMO the best solution, as John Gruber suggested, is to implement
specific support for Markdown interpretation in HTML block-level
elements:

Dan

From tim.visher at gmail.com  Tue Apr 28 17:18:14 2009
From: tim.visher at gmail.com (Tim Visher)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:18:14 -0400
Subject: Inline Link Error?
Message-ID: 

Hello Everyone,

Can someone spot the error in the following snippet of link text?  It
doesn't work through php-markdown in wordpress and I just wanted to
know if there's something obvious I'm missing.

Thanks in advance!

    can come of us.  "Every good and perfect gift comes from above" ([James
    1:17](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:17;&version=47;
    "@Bible Gateway")) is one way that I might choose to prove this.  In other
    words, in a very real sense, works of theology and doctrine and works of

-- 

In Christ,

Timmy V.

http://burningones.com/
http://five.sentenc.es/ - Spend less time on e-mail

From orc at pell.chi.il.us  Tue Apr 28 18:56:12 2009
From: orc at pell.chi.il.us (david parsons)
Date: 28 Apr 2009 22:56:12 GMT
Subject: Inline Link Error?
References: 
Message-ID: 

In article ,
Tim Visher   wrote:
>Hello Everyone,
>
>Can someone spot the error in the following snippet of link text?

>    can come of us.  "Every good and perfect gift comes from above" ([James
>    1:17](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:17;&version=47;
>    "@Bible Gateway"))

   What does php markdown translate this text to?

   -david parsons

From sgbotsford at gmail.com  Tue Apr 28 19:32:06 2009
From: sgbotsford at gmail.com (Sherwood Botsford)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:32:06 -0600
Subject: Inline Link Error?
In-Reply-To: 
References: 

Message-ID: <534004cc0904281632g8e64e88qd612f75b44d3cff3@mail.gmail.com>

I tested with command line version of MM 1.024.  It ignores the link
reference unless it starts on it's own line.

E.g.  This works:
   can come of us.  "Every good and perfect gift comes from above" (
[James 1:17](
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:17;&version=47;
"@Bible Gateway")
)

It also works with the link not in ()   So without digging into the code
(I've looked at it, and I'm convinced that Regex's are a write only
language.)
I'd say that you've discovered a {bug|feature}

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:56 PM, david parsons  wrote:

> In article ,
> Tim Visher   wrote:
> >Hello Everyone,
> >
> >Can someone spot the error in the following snippet of link text?
>
> >    can come of us.  "Every good and perfect gift comes from above"
> ([James
> >    1:17](
> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:17;&version=47;
> >    "@Bible Gateway"))
>
>    What does php markdown translate this text to?
>
>
>   -david parsons
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>

-- 
Sherwood Botsford
Sherwood's Forests
Warburg, Alberta T0C 2T0
http://www.sherwoods-forests.com
780-848-2548
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

From waylan at gmail.com  Tue Apr 28 19:32:27 2009
From: waylan at gmail.com (Waylan Limberg)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:32:27 -0400
Subject: Inline Link Error?
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: 

I just checked on http://babelmark.bobtfish.net/ and it appears that
some implementations (PHP included) do not work when the link is
broken across multiple lines. However, if the link is all on one line,
it's not a problem. I realize that makes for a long line, but use
reference links instead of inline and you won't have that issue.
Besides, it's easier to read.

That said, this probably is a bug in PHP markdown as many (most)
implementations do recognize the link even though it's broken across
multiple lines.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Tim Visher  wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Can someone spot the error in the following snippet of link text? ?It
> doesn't work through php-markdown in wordpress and I just wanted to
> know if there's something obvious I'm missing.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> ? ?can come of us. ?"Every good and perfect gift comes from above" ([James
> ? ?1:17](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:17;&version=47;
> ? ?"@Bible Gateway")) is one way that I might choose to prove this. ?In other
> ? ?words, in a very real sense, works of theology and doctrine and works of
>
> --
>
> In Christ,
>
> Timmy V.
>
> http://burningones.com/
> http://five.sentenc.es/ - Spend less time on e-mail
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>

-- 
----
\X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\|
Waylan Limberg

From michel.fortin at michelf.com  Tue Apr 28 20:47:09 2009
From: michel.fortin at michelf.com (Michel Fortin)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:47:09 -0400
Subject: Inline Link Error?
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: 

Le 2009-04-28 ? 17:18, Tim Visher a ?crit :

> Hello Everyone,
>
> Can someone spot the error in the following snippet of link text?  It
> doesn't work through php-markdown in wordpress and I just wanted to
> know if there's something obvious I'm missing.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>    can come of us.  "Every good and perfect gift comes from  
> above" ([James
>    1:17](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:17;&version=47 
> ;
>    "@Bible Gateway")) is one way that I might choose to prove this.   
> In other
>    words, in a very real sense, works of theology and doctrine and  
> works of

It seems that PHP Markdown doesn't like a line break between the URL  
and the title in the link above. It does that for images too.

Line 689 of PHP Markdown: change

	[ ]*

for

	[ \n]*

That should fix it (not tested yet though).

I'll fix that for the next release, whenever that may be.

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/