text/markdown effort in IETF (invite)

Aristotle Pagaltzis pagaltzis at gmx.de
Thu Jul 10 15:08:54 EDT 2014

* Fletcher T. Penney <fletcher at fletcherpenney.net> [2014-07-10 18:30]:
> I suppose it's debatable as to how "non-local" that effect is
> considered,

I do consider that local. “Local-enough” at least. Tellingly though it’s
also the most common single reason for “how do I” user inquiries on this

> A less debatable example is fenced code blocks

Yes, true.

The annoying thing is, while I was against them when the proposal was
brought up for Markdown in general, after spending some time using them
(by way of GitHub), I do find them convenient as a user. So now I have
a dilemma.

                                — • —

Still though – because fenced code blocks are an extension, they don’t
much change the principle of what I said: if you use a fenced code
block, then try to render the document using some other processor which
doesn’t support them, you get a garbled code block and then the rest of
the document after that looks fine.

Conversely a documents written for processors that do not support fenced
code blocks are rather unlikely to contain something that looks as if it
were – which would then lead to large-scale botch if you tried to render
them using a processor that supports fenced code blocks. (I feel this is
especially so for backtick fences. Tilda fences seem to have some remote
likelihood of being used as an innocuous part of a non-fenced-code-block

Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

More information about the Markdown-Discuss mailing list