3 ms·

Is there a document spec out there that is more feature-full than Markdown, but isn't Latex? Is it even possible to create such a spec and not end up re-creati

• cybersvenn 9y ago
  Asciidoc?
• WorldMaker 9y ago
  Asciidoc and restructuredText both have more features, stronger specifications [1]. reStructuredText has strong official support for extensions, including regular syntaxes in the language for using extension points consistently. That power alone makes it suitable for a lot of domain-specific documents, which is why IMNSHO a lot of the better software documentation is in reStructuredText rather than Markdown. [1] Don't forget that for Markdown the only "official" spec for that name is a blog post and a Perl script. CommonMark is very well specified now, but is A) surprisingly quite recent despite the proliferation of Markdown usage, and B) technically a forked specification and "not official" and not allowed to use the name "Markdown" by the original author/developer.
  • bb88 9y ago
    The one advantage I saw over markdown vs rsT, say, was that documents with markdown looked good when viewed in Vim as well. But when I'm including code in a doc I much rather prefer rsT, because I can specify the code type so the syntax highlighter doesn't have to guess about the language.
    • WorldMaker 9y ago
      There are Vim syntax highlight scripts for rST, but they've never been included in the base install like Markdown. This is the one I used for years, I believe: https://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=973 https://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=973 Looks like several people recommend this script: https://github.com/dhabyx/riv.vim https://github.com/dhabyx/riv.vim
• piotrkubisa 9y ago
  Does Leanpub Markua (http://markua.com/ http://markua.com/) fit into your requirements?