Proposed table specification (long!)
waysoftheearth at yahoo.com.au
Tue May 10 19:47:18 EDT 2011
Thanks for your replies gentlemen. I'm not surprised by the lack of...
I would like to add, in reply to Waylan's comment about "prose", that
markdown already includes syntax for lists, link, horizontal rules, images
and so on which are not "prose" either. Surely markdown can only be a more
useful tool with table support than without it.
I agree with David's comment that the specification needs an implementation
before people will take it seriously. I did, however, think it was a
reasonable notion to firstly propose a solution, then have it reviewed by a
meaningful authority (i.e., this list), and then think about implementing
I will leave it to simmer a while before I go any further with it.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:37 PM, David Parsons <orc at pell.portland.or.us>wrote:
> On May 10, 2011, at 5:31 AM, Simon Bull wrote:
>> I have been thinking on Markdown's lack of "proper" table support for a
>> long while now. Here's where I have arrived...
>> *Please note* that I have _not_ implemented this specification. This is
>> all just hot air produced by an author trying contribute something toward
>> better table support for markdown.
> I think this is a case where you'd do better writing
> a table preprocessor that implements your table extension.
> Yours is a fairly complex implementation, and there's not
> a painless way for people to try it out. The existing
> table implementation (the php markdown extra one) is kind
> of klunky and horrible, but the code is there and authors
> can actually see a working implementation before going and
> implementing it themselves. Yours, at least as of right
> now, is just documentation and not very useful for getting
> ones fingers into the pie.
> -david parsons
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Markdown-Discuss