2 ms·
The easiest counterargument possible: Good writing doesn't need syntax. Sinclair and Joyce and Fitzgerald and Twain didn't need italics or heading tags: just
by jmduke 13y ago
The easiest counterargument possible:
Good writing doesn't need syntax. Sinclair and Joyce and Fitzgerald and Twain didn't need italics or heading tags: just like structuring a post as a list is a sign of structural weakness, designating something with a header tag is admitting defeat, is admitting "Hey, look at this, this means something is happening over here."
(I love Markdown, and use it daily.)
- adregan 13y agoMarkdown is great for writing on the web, but it's not the future of writing. I love markdown, but all word processing is still so restrictive compared to earlier forms of composition, and HTML is still a horrible medium for poetry: Hannah Weiner used to manipulate the page in her typewriter for great effects in the 70s and 80s (http://www.ubu.com/ubu/pdf/weiner_indians.pdf http://www.ubu.com/ubu/pdf/weiner_indians.pdf). Charles Olson called the page an open field in 1950 (http://www.poetryfoundation.org/learning/poetics-essay/237880 http://www.poetryfoundation.org/learning/poetics-essay/23788...). Our linear text flow doesn't allow for the kind of poetry that Apollinaire was making in the early 20th century (http://ubumexico.centro.org.mx/text/Apollinaire_Calligrams.pdf http://ubumexico.centro.org.mx/text/Apollinaire_Calligrams.p...). Heck, for that matter HTML can't even maintain line breaks or distinguish stanzas (should they be p tags?).
- lifeformed 13y agoTwo different mediums. Fictional literature is about communicating with words in a book. Web articles are about communicating with words on the internet, which is much more visual, interactive, and malleable. If you can improve communication with proper formatting, go for it, if it fits the medium.