RFC: Markdown Table Syntax

[David E. Wheeler]

On Feb 26, 2009, at 6:47 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:


> Perhaps you should mention that you're now forcing a table cells to  

> be properly aligned using a monospace font. This in fact makes the  

> syntax impossible to use in a proportional font context.

>

> While it's true that many people use a monospace font and that in a  

> text editor you can change the font, I'd like to mention that  

> Markdown is also used for writing comments and blog posts in  

> textareas not formatted with a monospace font, and for which it may  

> not be easy to change the font. Forcing proper alignment makes the  

> table syntax unusable in these situations.

>

> Now, given that cell continuation using colons relies on that proper  

> alignment with a monospace font feature (or else you risk mistaking  

> colons in the text for column separators), I don't find that syntax  

> very satisfying.


Well, they're not mutually exclusive. If we continue to allow the use  
of the colon to suggest alignment, and if a user doesn't need to  
continue a line, then the existing MultiMarkdown syntax should  
continue to work, even with a proportional font. But to get the line  
continuation feature, I don't see any way to do it other than  
requiring proper spacing.

Of course, I'm so used to looking at database output in a terminal  
session using [Consolas][] that I'm sure I'm quite biased when it  
comes to spacing tables with a monospaced font.

[Consolas] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolas


> Allowing `+` as column separator in the header underline looks like  

> a good idea though.


Yeah, that alone allows one to simply paste most any output from psql  
or mysql and have it just work.

Best,

David