3 ms·

I don't think Jeff Atwood was asking for additional features, merely fixing some of the obvious issues with the original specification: anyone who has used it a

by spxdcz 17y ago

I don't think Jeff Atwood was asking for additional features, merely fixing some of the obvious issues with the original specification: anyone who has used it a couple of times will have run into the weird_filename_italics_thing. If the down button on the Apple Remote didn't work, that wouldn't be 'minimalism', it would be broken.

spxdcz 17y ago
And a case in point: I reckon that the word 'simply' in the first sentence of the blog article should be 'simple' (ok, so it could make sense with either word, but 'simple' would be more readable). Now, should the author correct the mistake? Or would that not respect the 'minimalism' with which it was written? We wouldn't want to have to produce a feature-bloated version 2 of the article, would we?
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- ihumanable 17y ago
  You are correct, I should have typed simple, it is fixed now, thanks for the correction.
grogers 17y ago
Anyone who has been bitten by that one a couple times will just do the sane thing and escape the underscores or use backtick code tags around the words you need to have underscores in. It would only be _obviously_ wrong if it didn't even let you workaround the format characters.
- bruceboughton 17y ago
  I'm not sure why you think escaping is an obvious and suitable concept for a simple markup language like Markdown.
  - farmerbuzz 17y ago
    When trying to write a grammar that describes Markdown escaping is the obvious and suitable solution.
  - grogers 17y ago
    Its because its so simple that it causes the surprising behavior. But it is only surprising the first time. After that you realize that everything between two underscores means highlight that section of text. If you actually wanted the underscores you have to do it manually, whats wrong with that?
    - natrius 17y ago
      The common case should be simple. How often do I want to italicize part of a word? That's what should require escaping.

by spxdcz 17y ago

spxdcz 17y ago

And a case in point: I reckon that the word 'simply' in the first sentence of the blog article should be 'simple' (ok, so it could make sense with either word, but 'simple' would be more readable). Now, should the author correct the mistake? Or would that not respect the 'minimalism' with which it was written? We wouldn't want to have to produce a feature-bloated version 2 of the article, would we?

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
ihumanable 17y ago
You are correct, I should have typed simple, it is fixed now, thanks for the correction.

grogers 17y ago

Anyone who has been bitten by that one a couple times will just do the sane thing and escape the underscores or use backtick code tags around the words you need to have underscores in. It would only be _obviously_ wrong if it didn't even let you workaround the format characters.

bruceboughton 17y ago
I'm not sure why you think escaping is an obvious and suitable concept for a simple markup language like Markdown.
- farmerbuzz 17y ago
  When trying to write a grammar that describes Markdown escaping is the obvious and suitable solution.
- grogers 17y ago
  Its because its so simple that it causes the surprising behavior. But it is only surprising the first time. After that you realize that everything between two underscores means highlight that section of text. If you actually wanted the underscores you have to do it manually, whats wrong with that?
  - natrius 17y ago
    The common case should be simple. How often do I want to italicize part of a word? That's what should require escaping.