Daniel Carrera <[email protected]> writes: > Spoke with Eric. As a temporary measure I'll use HTML for the features > that Pandoc doesn't currently support, just so we can make progress on > the transition to the new wiki. The long-term goal is to actually have > everything done in reST. So as Pandoc's support for reST improves we > can steadily replace HTML with reST.
This approach is acceptable to me, particularly compared to markdown. Sorry if I appear to be giving mixed advocacy messages; I'm conflating the end goal "everything in reST, raw HTML is totally wrong" with the current situation "reST where we can, HTML where we can't". Markdown's specification is very limited, and various implementors creature mutually exclusive "extensions". I'm not keen on this -- I used to be a Schemer! By contrast, reST has a pretty comprehensive specification, and some well-defined mechanisms for extending it. So in other words, for reST it's our implementation that's deficient, rather than the standard. Implementors working on improving reST support have a standard to work to, so they can focus on implementation and leave the language design to David Goodger. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
