waylan at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 18:58:56 EDT 2012
Why would you want this? There is already to many features which rely
on white space (manual line breaks being the most obvious). Those
existing features have been some of the most problematic - they are
hard to read (you can't see the whitespace) and it is hard to get
right as a writer (again because you can't see it). Besides, there are
already too many ways to create emphasis. Do we really need another
one? I realize markdown does not follow the "one and only one way to
do things" philosophy, but getting farther away from it doesn't help
Add to the above all the cons mentioned by Fletcher and I see no
reason to implement such a syntax.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Jakob <jakov at gmx.at> wrote:
> Hi eveybody!
> I've got a suggestion to think about. Although i think that the drawbacks are bigher than the advantages im goong to tell you abou my idea:
> My idea is another syntax for e m p h a s i z e d words. It uses two spaces before and after the emphasized part and alternating space and letter in between, just like in the sentence before.
> • no symbol needed
> • granny compatible ;) similar look as on old typwritten texts
> • emphasis visible in raw text
> • extensible with * or _ for * s t r o n g * emphasis
> • cant be searched for easily
> • cant be easily converted
> • only accepts blanks as starting and endpoint (e.g. You could write " b l a h , " instead of " *blah,* " but i see no way to write " *blah*, " in spaced text.
> Maybe someone has ideas on how to avoid the drawbacks or oher possible uses.
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
\X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\|
More information about the Markdown-Discuss