3 ms·
From the podcast linked below, my rough summary of his position: Essentially, that while a spec that cleared up some ambiguity might be useful and is a task he
by smackfu 12y ago
From the podcast linked below, my rough summary of his position: Essentially, that while a spec that cleared up some ambiguity might be useful and is a task he might undertake someday, calling one thing "true markdown" and other flavors not wouldn't be useful. If Github wants to have a version of markdown that supports code better than a blog engine needs, good for them.
- brian_c 12y agoSo basically follow the example of pre-standards browser-specific HTML features?
- smackfu 12y agoTo be clear, "Standard Markdown" is only trying to address the ambiguity of the syntax. Sites are still going to implement Standard Markdown plus some ad hoc extensions, so it will still be the same practically in that regard.
- adamlett 12y agoWhen you are considering how two things are alike, don't forget to also think about the ways in which they are not. Unlike with HTML, content producers who write Markdown, don't need their documents to be parsed correctly by many different engines. They only have to target the one they are using.
- lmm 12y agoWhich was where most innovation and the good parts of modern HTML came from?