4 ms·
It kind of sounds like you have disagreed over the same things for five years now, and finally got enough names on your side that you decided you didn't need to
by smackfu 12y ago
It kind of sounds like you have disagreed over the same things for five years now, and finally got enough names on your side that you decided you didn't need to get agreement and could just take over the name.
Not cool.
- happyscrappy 12y agoGruber should make a question and answer site called Standard StackOverflow.
- oblio 12y agoAnd it should take over if StackOverflow's service is crappy.
- libria 12y agoWhatever. I really respect Gruber for his original design of markdown, but am puzzled by his destructive behavior in this. While he was sitting on his hands, a lot of us have been annoyed at creating a markdown doc in one app and finding it looks funny in another client. This spec is long overdue. He can still choose to be caustic and demand a rebrand, but it'll only delay the inevitable replacement of the original markdown.
- math0ne 12y agoBut wont that always be an issue because vendors will have to disable features selectively. I see the merits of a standard from a developer standpoint but I don't think hat solves the problem you are describing.
- jrochkind1 12y agoGruber has been okay with people writing and distributing their own markdown processors, with whatever variations they want. The difference here is that they wrote a spec for the variation they plan to implement? That somehow makes it not cool? Or just that they're calling it "Standard Markdown"? Could the dispute be avoided if they called it "A Standardized Markdown", or "Standardized Flavor of Markdown" instead? There are many markdowns, and Gruber likes that, fine. Other people would like to standardize and make compatible implementations. Nothing's stopping people who disagree from continuing to ignore the standardized spec. But where' the logic in saying "you can release whatever markdown variations you like, as long as you don't try to make different implementations compatible with each other."
- tomjen3 12y agoIt really should be obvious that none of those other names are acceptable. Github-flavored markup is obvious because it is _not_ taking the name from the author and it is not lying about where it comes from. Standard markdown lies about where it comes from and thus claims more authority than it is due. Formalize it all you want, then name it coding horror markup. I don't see how stealing other peoples credit is acceptable.