Punchline: variants and processor (text/markdown)

Michel Fortin michel.fortin at michelf.ca
Tue Jul 15 08:59:10 EDT 2014

Le 15-juil.-2014 à 3:20, Sean Leonard <dev+ietf at seantek.com> a écrit :

> IANA would create a sub-registry of processors. Each registry entry must contain the processor name (identifier), the full name of the tool (if it differs from the processor name), the authors or maintainers, and any URL or other address at which to locate the processor tool and documentation. Optionally, versions and processor-specific arguments can be documented in the registry entry.


> IANA would create a sub-registry of rulesets for the variants parameter. Each registry entry must include the ruleset identifier, a formal description of the rules, and identification of included rulesets. Optionally the entry may describe processors (including versions and arguments) that are known to implement the ruleset.
> Each ruleset identifier shall uniquely identify that set of rules. I.e., if "fenced_code_blocks" is registered, "guarded_code_blocks" cannot be registered if the effective rules in "guarded_code_blocks" are the same as "fenced_code_blocks".

But how does a document get annotated with the attributes in the first place? Who chooses the processor and variant attributes of a document and based on what? And where is it stored? Do you have any specific example of how that could work in any given setup?

My impression is that all this is going to do is define some metadata flags that no one will use.

What is the goal here? Is the goal to have most Markdown documents on the internet be annotated in this way so some browser software can pick automatically a sort-of compatible implementation for a given document? Or is it a way to have inside a given system (a CMS for instance) a way to annotate which Markdown implementation to use internally to parse a specific document?

Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.ca

More information about the Markdown-Discuss mailing list