different people have different perceptions of what markdown is, what its goals are/should be. html started simple, and went down a path of unreadable complexi

different people have different perceptions of what markdown is, what its goals are/should be. html started simple, and went down a path of unreadable complexity. markdown has already started down that path with the mathjax stuff, urls, images, etc, all of it ugly and paradigm shattering. The markdown document should be fully readable; the new changes are making it "nope, you're gonna need a viewer". I think people gonna need to learn to comfortably read markdown. i'm not opposed to this suggestion (as if what i think matters to anybody but me), but seems to me it needs to be considered in light of other semantic needs other usages might want, and hopefully the discovery of common syntax elements that serve multiple/overlapping purposes, something that's not simply one weird scheme within another weird scheme. This syntax seems busy. What's the justification for each and every additional character? I'd rather see (maybe/depending) a diff based "view both side by side" sort of tool working from two versions of the file, perhaps with an annotation file. I'd differentiate between changes that fix typos ("must haves") vs fixing language/meaning ("requests") I think it's a big mistake to go the way that C (for example) went, where every possible ascii character has a meaning, and nothing can be changed without breaking it. markdown needs a Benevolent Dictator for Life for the time being.