3 ms·

Not going to happen. Markdown has been a godsend to me in getting my thoughts in writing in a way others can consume, which is critical in my business. My tim

Not going to happen. Markdown has been a godsend to me in getting my thoughts in writing in a way others can consume, which is critical in my business. My time is already at a premium, and Markdown is both readable to technical and non-technical users, as well as easily parsable to other formats. This blog post doesn't get it. It immediately starts touting advanced complex features as a benefit. The benefit of Markdown is the absence of advanced complex features. It's my absolute guarantee that what I write is readable and understandable to all audiences and can easily be converted into rich HTML docs with embedded media. I am not going to stop using Markdown any time soon, and I hope nobody else does either.

reidjs 7y ago
Same! I even paid for an app (something I never do) just because it supports creating markdown files on your iphone (ia writer - I don't work for them I just like their product)
seph-reed 7y ago
> I am not going to stop using Markdown any time soon, and I hope nobody else does either. I wish more people would. I spent a whole 2 minutes fighting with the text styler in a gmail draft today. One of my bullet points ended in styled text, so it really wanted the next bullet point to be that style too. The whole cmd-shift-v for unstyled pasting wasn't the issue. Selecting the text and unstyling it removed the bullet point. The trick was to unstyle all the text except for the first letter, then delete that and type it back in. Would rather just have used MD.
- input_sh 7y ago
  You may be interested: https://markdown-here.com/features.html https://markdown-here.com/features.html
cbarrick 7y ago
If you're a fan of markdown, take a look at reStructuredText (RST). The syntax is very similar to markdown, e.g. italics, bold, and ``code``, but includes things that are inextricably missing from markdown, like definition lists, tables, footnotes, citations, comments, etc. I think the best counter argument to your comment is that RST has all of the benefits you've listed (easy to write, readable by technical and non-technical users, and translatable into HTML and other formats) plus more. The syntax of RST is just as lightweight as markdown, making RST appropriate in all of the same places. In use cases where markdown is under-defined, e.g. technical documentation, there are a variety of competing syntaxes, e.g. the non-standard ``{.foo}`` syntax or the competing flavors of tables. On the other hand, RST has a pair of extensible constructs, called roles and directives, that allows various systems to add features in a portable way. If a particular system doesn't support a particular role/directive, there is a graceful fallback. This is in contrast with markdown where the fallback is to dump your custom syntax into the document as plain text. FWIW, this comment is valid RST. https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtext.html https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtex... P.S. The HN web UI swallows my examples of bold and italics in the first paragraph.

reidjs 7y ago

Same! I even paid for an app (something I never do) just because it supports creating markdown files on your iphone (ia writer - I don't work for them I just like their product)

seph-reed 7y ago

> I am not going to stop using Markdown any time soon, and I hope nobody else does either. I wish more people would. I spent a whole 2 minutes fighting with the text styler in a gmail draft today. One of my bullet points ended in styled text, so it really wanted the next bullet point to be that style too. The whole cmd-shift-v for unstyled pasting wasn't the issue. Selecting the text and unstyling it removed the bullet point. The trick was to unstyle all the text except for the first letter, then delete that and type it back in. Would rather just have used MD.

input_sh 7y ago
You may be interested: https://markdown-here.com/features.html https://markdown-here.com/features.html

cbarrick 7y ago

If you're a fan of markdown, take a look at reStructuredText (RST). The syntax is very similar to markdown, e.g. italics, bold, and ``code``, but includes things that are inextricably missing from markdown, like definition lists, tables, footnotes, citations, comments, etc. I think the best counter argument to your comment is that RST has all of the benefits you've listed (easy to write, readable by technical and non-technical users, and translatable into HTML and other formats) plus more. The syntax of RST is just as lightweight as markdown, making RST appropriate in all of the same places. In use cases where markdown is under-defined, e.g. technical documentation, there are a variety of competing syntaxes, e.g. the non-standard ``{.foo}`` syntax or the competing flavors of tables. On the other hand, RST has a pair of extensible constructs, called roles and directives, that allows various systems to add features in a portable way. If a particular system doesn't support a particular role/directive, there is a graceful fallback. This is in contrast with markdown where the fallback is to dump your custom syntax into the document as plain text. FWIW, this comment is valid RST. https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtext.html https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtex... P.S. The HN web UI swallows my examples of bold and italics in the first paragraph.