24 ms·

We changed the syntax and now it's called Markdown.

JulianMorrison 10y ago
For all people are downvoting, I think you're right, the workflow of editing in Markdown and rendering to text is pretty similar. Something like Pandoc that extends raw Markdown gives you control codes that easily match and exceed what WordStar could do. Well, except comments, those are a bit annoying. But you can add them as inline footnotes which does simplify checking whether you've missed any.
- Something1234 10y ago
  You can use html comments to leave them 
  - JulianMorrison 10y ago
    Except those get transplanted into the output for all to read if they can view source.
    - dredmorbius 10y ago
      Pre-pass through a sed, awk, perl, etc., filter to remove them. Make that part of your document build. If you're concerned.
chipotle_coyote 10y ago
Well, in a spiritual sense, sorta kinda. But only sorta kinda. The problem: Markdown : WordStar _Formatting Codes_ :: ??? : WordStar WordStar was the _editor._ Markdown is _embedded formatting codes._ I'd really like to see a terrific editor based around Markdown, but despite looking at a whole lot of them, none of them are really quite as good as my favorite lost word processor, XyWrite. (XyWrite also used embedded formatting codes, and in fact was arguably closer to Markdown than anything else, as its files were just plain text with markup. When I needed to access a few very old files a couple years ago, I could convert them from XyWrite to Markdown with a few search and replace operations.) What I'd really like to see is an editor that pays attention to aesthetics the way Ulysses, Byword, and MultiMarkdown Composer do, but pays attention to "power user" features the way a text editor like Atom, BBEdit or Sublime Text do. Just because I'm writing prose rather than code doesn't mean I don't occasionally need regex-based search and replace, or God forbid, want to do something crazy like split the window pane to see two different places in the same file at the same time.

For all people are downvoting, I think you're right, the workflow of editing in Markdown and rendering to text is pretty similar. Something like Pandoc that extends raw Markdown gives you control codes that easily match and exceed what WordStar could do. Well, except comments, those are a bit annoying. But you can add them as inline footnotes which does simplify checking whether you've missed any.

Something1234 10y ago
You can use html comments to leave them 
- JulianMorrison 10y ago
  Except those get transplanted into the output for all to read if they can view source.
  - dredmorbius 10y ago
    Pre-pass through a sed, awk, perl, etc., filter to remove them. Make that part of your document build. If you're concerned.

chipotle_coyote 10y ago

Well, in a spiritual sense, sorta kinda. But only sorta kinda. The problem: Markdown : WordStar _Formatting Codes_ :: ??? : WordStar WordStar was the _editor._ Markdown is _embedded formatting codes._ I'd really like to see a terrific editor based around Markdown, but despite looking at a whole lot of them, none of them are really quite as good as my favorite lost word processor, XyWrite. (XyWrite also used embedded formatting codes, and in fact was arguably closer to Markdown than anything else, as its files were just plain text with markup. When I needed to access a few very old files a couple years ago, I could convert them from XyWrite to Markdown with a few search and replace operations.) What I'd really like to see is an editor that pays attention to aesthetics the way Ulysses, Byword, and MultiMarkdown Composer do, but pays attention to "power user" features the way a text editor like Atom, BBEdit or Sublime Text do. Just because I'm writing prose rather than code doesn't mean I don't occasionally need regex-based search and replace, or God forbid, want to do something crazy like split the window pane to see two different places in the same file at the same time.