4 ms·

Google Chat is also somewhat terrible at it. Want to italicize some text? Easy right, just do it like this.. nope that will bake it BOLD, gotta write it like

by m-p-3 2y ago

Google Chat is also somewhat terrible at it. Want to italicize some text? Easy right, just do it like *this*.. nope that will bake it BOLD, gotta write it like _this_ for italics. https://support.google.com/chat/answer/7649118 https://support.google.com/chat/answer/7649118 The only thing I like is that you can colorize text, but there's no syntax for it, you gotta highlight it then choose a color in the formatting toolbar. It's annoying to no end when you memorized the syntax and Google decides to not even follow it.

deathanatos 2y ago
Way back in the day when I was on IRC, I usually read them as, *bold* /italics/ _underline_ … which would have made sense, if you stop to think about the characters. (But of course humans are wibbly-wobbly in what they'll choose, so context is context.) Alas, bold is now different in everything, it seems, and I can never remember which is which, aside from Discord which gives visual feedback.
- account42 2y ago
 And even HTML was not safe because and were too easy so now we have and because somehow those are more meaningful.
 - collinmanderson 2y ago
 The worst part of the to migration is now often gets used for book titles, which is completely wrong. Book titles aren’t emphasized, they’re italicized. If someone hits control+I, or an italics button, it should use tags, not .
pitaj 2y ago
I think one of Markdown's biggest mistake was making `*` and `_` interchangeable. It should have been `*bold*` and `_italics_` from the beginning.
- m-p-3 2y ago
  I agree with you on that. What about * for bold, / for italic and _ for underline?
  - ysavir 2y ago
    / is too commonly used, such as when making a list of replacements/alternatives/synonyms. It works fine when it's just the text as written, but if it was parsing and turned that list to replacementsalternativessynonyms, it would only be getting in the way.
    - adrian_b 2y ago
      True. Perhaps //italic text// would be acceptable.
      - account42 2y ago
        // is common in URIs.
    - bmacho 2y ago
      You shouldn't parse '/' in foo/bar/baz or in foo / bar / baz. If people want to make foo or foo bar italic, they write /foo/ and /foo bar/.
- jgruber 2y ago
  I have no regrets on this one. I thought people would use both, and people do use both.
- bmacho 2y ago
  HN uses *italics*. I, myself, prefer /italics/, _underline_ and _bold_ in text, if there is no formatting. I feel that these 2 are the least arbitrary, they almost work without agreeing on their meaning beforehand.

Google Chat is also somewhat terrible at it. Want to italicize some text? Easy right, just do it like *this*.. nope that will bake it BOLD, gotta write it like

by m-p-3 2y ago

deathanatos 2y ago

Way back in the day when I was on IRC, I usually read them as, *bold* /italics/ _underline_ … which would have made sense, if you stop to think about the characters. (But of course humans are wibbly-wobbly in what they'll choose, so context is context.) Alas, bold is now different in everything, it seems, and I can never remember which is which, aside from Discord which gives visual feedback.

account42 2y ago
And even HTML was not safe because and were too easy so now we have and because somehow those are more meaningful.
- collinmanderson 2y ago
 The worst part of the to migration is now often gets used for book titles, which is completely wrong. Book titles aren’t emphasized, they’re italicized. If someone hits control+I, or an italics button, it should use tags, not .

pitaj 2y ago

I think one of Markdown's biggest mistake was making `*` and `_` interchangeable. It should have been `*bold*` and `_italics_` from the beginning.

m-p-3 2y ago
I agree with you on that. What about * for bold, / for italic and _ for underline?
- ysavir 2y ago
  / is too commonly used, such as when making a list of replacements/alternatives/synonyms. It works fine when it's just the text as written, but if it was parsing and turned that list to replacementsalternativessynonyms, it would only be getting in the way.
  - adrian_b 2y ago
    True. Perhaps //italic text// would be acceptable.
    - account42 2y ago
      // is common in URIs.
  - bmacho 2y ago
    You shouldn't parse '/' in foo/bar/baz or in foo / bar / baz. If people want to make foo or foo bar italic, they write /foo/ and /foo bar/.
jgruber 2y ago
I have no regrets on this one. I thought people would use both, and people do use both.
bmacho 2y ago
HN uses *italics*. I, myself, prefer /italics/, _underline_ and _bold_ in text, if there is no formatting. I feel that these 2 are the least arbitrary, they almost work without agreeing on their meaning beforehand.