I like this a lot, and I think it's an important contribution! I think it's a major advantage that the formatting description is provided using words rather th

I like this a lot, and I think it's an important contribution! I think it's a major advantage that the formatting description is provided using words rather than combinations of symbols. Symbols need to be learned, aren't always intuitive (like the markdown link example), and there are only so many combinations of them. Instructions in words can be far more flexible. I think this a great v1.0, and I look forward to v2.0 and beyond. (I expect that now that this idea has been shared, several people will create spin offs, which is a good thing.) Some ideas (most of which are no doubt bad but might generate other ideas): Aftertext to Markdown would be useful and help take advantage of the existing Markdown tool ecosystem. I wonder if it would be useful to introduce ONE or a very limited set of symbols? For example, perhaps a symbol like ">" or "#" at the beginning of a line to indicate that the following content is formatting instructions for the previous line. But maybe this takes the idea backward. I wonder if some kinds of formatting could be indicated before rather than after the content, in a way that would be more readable? For example: "heading:". Maybe this is where a symbol or two could be used to differentiate between whether formatting applies to the preceding or following content, or perhaps a colon (:) at the end of the formatting instruction indicates that. Maybe this could co-exist as an alternative, more expressive syntax within Markdown? For example, for less intuitive constructs like link(this)[that], Aftertext would provide a more intuitive and readable interface even for someone who didn't know Markdown. Maybe Aftertext style isn't needed for things like bold, underline, and italics, because using * or _ or / may be intuitive enough (although Aftertext would be available if it isn't). Aftertext could also give higher level directives, such as to create links for ALL instances of a particular phrase, or to format the document in a particular way or prefer a type of font if available. Aftertext could be used to introduce and set the meaning of special symbols that could then be used more conveniently in the document. For example: "*phrase* means bold". Could Aftertext be made inline with a small number of symbols and result in a net reduction of symbols and greater explicitness and intuitiveness? For example, could an unusual pairing of characters like (! or (: begin an inline Aftertext instruction? Example: (!link to ...). Certain complex Markdown instructions could be removed that way, or alternatives provided, or additional configuration enabled. This could also be configured with: "(!phrase) means inline instructions".