Markdown-Discuss Digest, Vol 139, Issue 3
ubi de feo
ubi at hellosavants.com
Tue Nov 11 02:09:43 EST 2014
thanks for sharing this, hadn't bumped into it yet :)
besides trying to define a set of specs for core, it's also a good run-down of basic rules and practices.
it may help me be more consistent in how I write MD.
there's a typo in "quoted text"
a greater-than symbol <
and I don't agree with "tables as images", that makes very little sense to me :D
On 11 Nov 2014, at 07:38, Jeff McNeill <jeff at jeffmcneill.com> wrote:
>> As a mere user, I've noticed the same thing. One of the purported
>> benefits of markdown is its portability, i.e., the ability of the user
>> to write in any editor, knowing that he can then load it into any number
>> of parsers and get consistent results.
>> But, with all the different flavors out there, one now has to think,
>> "which parser will I use to convert this file?" and insert markdown
>> accordingly. I recently discovered at least four different ways in which
>> parsers deal with typographic quotes and dashes, from the original
>> SmartyPants to the Python Markdown implementation of SmartyPants to the
>> Calibre implementation of it to RMarkdown's implementation (not to
>> mention ReStructuredText and Textile, both of which do it differently,
>> yet). So, I have to commit to a given dialect and converter before I
>> begin to type. To me, that's defeating one of the fundamental purposes
>> of markdown.
> I believe that is why a neutral, “Bland” Markdown recommendation is needed. Not as yet another parser or syntax but as something to tell writers and editors to use, so that their content can be properly processed.
> This is actually not too difficult. http://jeffmcneill.com/bland-markdown
> Jeff McNeill
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Markdown-Discuss