Le 2007-09-03 à 10:45, Jacob Rus a écrit :
Erm... wrong by what standard?
There's no standard for judging about these things, only many views and possible compromises.
Basically, I think Markdown (the syntax) is wrong when the syntax does not reflect what the author indented by what he wrote. We can't get it right every time, but we should make sure the various features are unlikely to be triggered by accident, and that even when they are the author isn't too confused about it and has an easy way out.
When I say *I think* something is wrong, it means that in my view we aren't following these directions. Note that it's an opinion and a jugement of mine, not a fact. You're entirely free to disagree.
This seems like an awfully fine line you're walking here. Basically you're saying John Gruber's official syntax description is "wrong" about intra-word emphasis, because you say so (even though such a change undoubtedly breaks some existing markdown documents, including some of mine incidentally)
I'm not against intra-word emphasis; I'm against intra-word emphasis using underscores.
PHP Markdown Extra still does support intra-word emphasis using asterisks. In the few years Extra has been out, I got positive feedback about that and never heard someone complain. That, of course, doesn't mean absolutely no one is inconvenienced by it, but I'd guess given the feedback I received that it pleased much more than it deceived.
Even then, I don't think we should do a parser that does change Markdown's definition of emphasis and call it "Markdown", not without John Gruber's blessing. That's why PHP Markdown -- which implements plain Markdown, not a derivative -- still does support intra-word emphasis with underscores even though it'd be trivial to change the behaviour.
Michel Fortin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.michelf.com/ _______________________________________________ Markdown-Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
