4 ms·
This sounds like a great idea in theory, but the execution seems to be a little scratchy. It sounds as though this is very much a unilateral decision from one
by thomasfoster96 12y ago
This sounds like a great idea in theory, but the execution seems to be a little scratchy.
It sounds as though this is very much a unilateral decision from one of the many sites that use Markdown to standardise it, masked by what seems to be a call for other companies with an interest in Markdown to join.
It seems a little questionable to me for John Gruber to have been ignored in this process. Afterall, he made Markdown and it probably would have been a better idea to take his rather ambiguous spec, develop it into a proper standard, and then call that version 1.0.
No doubt Jeff Atwood deserves some credit for trying to initiate a standards process for Markdown, but I think he's doing it the wrong way.
- frowaway001 12y ago> It seems a little questionable to me for John Gruber to have been ignored in this process. No, it's the other way around. Gruber decided to ignore everyone who tried to improve the sad state of Markdown for the last 10 years.
- thomasfoster96 12y agoYes, I was a bit wrong with that statement. Just read http://blog.codinghorror.com/responsible-open-source-code-parenting/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/responsible-open-source-code-pa...
- riking 12y agoAnd, if we look at the list of people who were writing it, we see Github, Meteor, Reddit, and StackExchange people (plus JGM and Atwood) as the participants, which I think cover the top 3 sites using Markdown. And Jeff is using Markdown for his forum project, Discourse, so that's another chunk of users. This kind of coalition has the power of numbers to standardize on something, which is why this is so exciting.
- oblio 12y agoGithub, Reddit, Stackoverflow. Those look like several big sites to me (not just one). And as many people said, Gruber is not some sort of BDFL...