I've not looked at the code, so not sure the best way to do this, but
I'd like to have Markdown as an option even if Textile becomes the
default -- it's under active development on a slew of platforms (e.g.
see [1][]) and has tools like [Pandoc][] which can convert to/from
PDF/XHTML/groff/DocBook/RTF etc. We're using it for all our docs.

[Showdown][] is a JS impl, so you can do Live Preview.

That said, there are aspects of the Textile syntax I rather prefer, from
an aesthetic POV., and it's more familiar to Rails devs -- and I won't
have time to code this up atm

If you don't mind adding a gem dependency (or including the code),
MaRuKu is a great alternative to BlueCloth which supports the "Markdown
Extra" syntax -- there's a standardisation effort underway at the moment.

Thomas.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markdown#Additional_implementations
[Pandoc]: http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/
[Showdown]: http://attacklab.net/showdown/

Eric Allen wrote on 2008/06/13 2:32:
> I was looking through commit #876 today and noticed that in some places we
> use markdown() to invoke RedCloth, and in others we use textilize(). Does it
> make sense to keep everything consistent? If so, it seems to me textilize()
> would be better, since it's a built-in Rails helper.
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tracks-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss
>   


_______________________________________________
Tracks-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss

Reply via email to