4 ms·

The (only) issue is that Markdown isn't a format, it's a loose family of formats with many extensions. Implementing a parser Commonmark is not an especially dif

The (only) issue is that Markdown isn't a format, it's a loose family of formats with many extensions. Implementing a parser Commonmark is not an especially difficult task in the grand scheme of things, it's quite well specified and has an extensive test suite. Although I find myself wondering what this "parsing Markdown" business is even about. It's perfectly legible as plain text, that was the main design principle behind it. If the goal is to have your data accessible in future, if you can read it now, and you don't go blind, you'll be able to read it later as well.

kragen 3y ago
in my comment 'markdown' does refer to a format, not a loose family of formats. that is also the case in the comment to which i am replying, as clarified in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39358594 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39358594, and it is also the case in the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39363100 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39363100. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39360358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39360358 is using the same divergent definition you are using, and other comments are ambiguous.) in the controversy around the release of commonmark, john gruber made it clear that his objection to the term 'standard markdown' was specifically that what he meant by 'markdown' was a specific syntax, not a loose family of formats; see https://nitter.lanterne-rouge.info/gruber/status/507651498692849665 https://nitter.lanterne-rouge.info/gruber/status/50765149869... > @twangus @s_margheim @danielpunkass They’ve done more than “formalize”. They’ve changed the syntax. New syntax, new name. That’s all I ask. you are of course free to use any word to mean whatever you like, however much it may annoy gruber; but consider that interpreting a word in a way at variance to the rest of the conversation will leave you, unnecessarily, wondering what the conversation is even about, as in this case if you want to discuss what people should mean when they say 'markdown', please leave me out of that discussion, and please do not attempt to use it to imply that my words meant something i did not intend it is true that markdown degrades gracefully, as does html. but graceful degradation is not the same thing as faithful preservation of archived documents it would of course not make sense to write a parser for a loose family of file formats, but it makes perfect sense to write a parser for a file format. as discussed extensively in the funding documents for a project we recently worked on together, this is in fact an essential activity for the faithful preservation of archived documents in that format
- samatman 3y ago
  > consider that interpreting a word in a way at variance to the rest of the conversation will leave you, unnecessarily, wondering what the conversation is even about, as in this case True. So why did you do so? You're well aware that in common parlance, markdown refers to any of the following incomplete list: Gruber's Markdown reference implementation (practically extinct in the wild), Git-flavored Markdown, and Commonmark. There are others, Julia's version of Markdown has some extensions and is missing at least one feature from the original. Its standard library for parsing this is called Markdown. To write the comment you wrote, you had to pretend that you didn't know this. That's disingenuous. That kind of "what you're referring to is actually GNU/Linux" sort of nitpick is annoying.
  - kragen 3y ago
    sam, you're capable of interesting, thought-provoking conversations and creations. this kind of kindergarten why-are-you-hitting-yourself nonsense is beneath you you're well aware you waltzed into a conversation where we were using 'markdown' in precisely the way you're claiming people don't use it, then attempted to impose your own definition on the conversation, despite the fact that the existing conversation made no sense when interpreted through it. doubling down on that by attacking my integrity is contemptible behavior you're not a contemptible person, and your better side will be ashamed of it when you look back on this conversation later

kragen 3y ago

in my comment 'markdown' does refer to a format, not a loose family of formats. that is also the case in the comment to which i am replying, as clarified in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39358594 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39358594, and it is also the case in the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39363100 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39363100. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39360358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39360358 is using the same divergent definition you are using, and other comments are ambiguous.) in the controversy around the release of commonmark, john gruber made it clear that his objection to the term 'standard markdown' was specifically that what he meant by 'markdown' was a specific syntax, not a loose family of formats; see https://nitter.lanterne-rouge.info/gruber/status/507651498692849665 https://nitter.lanterne-rouge.info/gruber/status/50765149869... > @twangus @s_margheim @danielpunkass They’ve done more than “formalize”. They’ve changed the syntax. New syntax, new name. That’s all I ask. you are of course free to use any word to mean whatever you like, however much it may annoy gruber; but consider that interpreting a word in a way at variance to the rest of the conversation will leave you, unnecessarily, wondering what the conversation is even about, as in this case if you want to discuss what people should mean when they say 'markdown', please leave me out of that discussion, and please do not attempt to use it to imply that my words meant something i did not intend it is true that markdown degrades gracefully, as does html. but graceful degradation is not the same thing as faithful preservation of archived documents it would of course not make sense to write a parser for a loose family of file formats, but it makes perfect sense to write a parser for a file format. as discussed extensively in the funding documents for a project we recently worked on together, this is in fact an essential activity for the faithful preservation of archived documents in that format

samatman 3y ago
> consider that interpreting a word in a way at variance to the rest of the conversation will leave you, unnecessarily, wondering what the conversation is even about, as in this case True. So why did you do so? You're well aware that in common parlance, markdown refers to any of the following incomplete list: Gruber's Markdown reference implementation (practically extinct in the wild), Git-flavored Markdown, and Commonmark. There are others, Julia's version of Markdown has some extensions and is missing at least one feature from the original. Its standard library for parsing this is called Markdown. To write the comment you wrote, you had to pretend that you didn't know this. That's disingenuous. That kind of "what you're referring to is actually GNU/Linux" sort of nitpick is annoying.
- kragen 3y ago
  sam, you're capable of interesting, thought-provoking conversations and creations. this kind of kindergarten why-are-you-hitting-yourself nonsense is beneath you you're well aware you waltzed into a conversation where we were using 'markdown' in precisely the way you're claiming people don't use it, then attempted to impose your own definition on the conversation, despite the fact that the existing conversation made no sense when interpreted through it. doubling down on that by attacking my integrity is contemptible behavior you're not a contemptible person, and your better side will be ashamed of it when you look back on this conversation later