On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 04:05:10PM +0200, Goffi wrote:
> Markdown is a terrible choice because:
>
> 1) as its name state it's a writting syntax and not a publishing one. There
> is
> not such thing as invalid Markdown (every text is valid Markdown), but the
> result will differ according to rendering library used.
> Even original author says that it's not a publishing format ("HTML is a
> publishing format; Markdown is a writing format." cf. https://
> daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax)
>
> 2) it's not specified and it's unlikely that it will be (and yes I know about
> common Markdown and RFCs about the MIME type and the guidance on Mardown).
>
> 3) there a dozen of flavours, more or less (in)compatibles
>
> 4) as stated by Jonas, it's really hard to extend without side results
> (should
> I interpret ~bla bla~ as strikethrough? Yes my librarie is doing it! Oh wait
> no, it's not an official syntax, there is not strikethrough in Markdown…
> https://daringfireball.net/linked/2015/11/05/markdown-strikethrough-slack ).
>
> 5) it's limited (no color, no strikethourgh in classic syntax)
>
> 6) official syntax allow embedding HTML, so libraries may or may not
> interpret
> <script> as HTML, ruining the whole purpose of "changing syntax because it's
> better for security".
>
>
> I've repeated this a couple of times in previous emails, and I haven't seen
> any of this point objected or answered.
I suggested using Creole 1.0 instead of Markdown in
https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2017-October/033556.html - I know
it doesn't have all the features you mention (ie. missing color), but I think
it addresses many/most of your other points, especially 2) and 6). Is it
insufficient in other ways?
Denver
https://jmp.chat/
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
