Thomas & Walter: They both handle both Markdown and Textile because
RedCloth parses both. There will be zero impact on user experience.
Reiner: the only difference appears to be hard breaks:
def markdown(text)
RedCloth.new(text).to_html
end
def textilize(text)
if text.blank?
""
else
textilized = RedCloth.new(text, [ :hard_breaks ])
textilized.hard_breaks = true if textilized.respond_to?
("hard_breaks=")
textilized.to_html
end
end
:hard_breaks means one newline is a <br/> and two makes a paragraph
On Jun 13, 2008, at 1:56 AM, Reinier Balt wrote:
> It does make sense to keep everything consistent. Is there much
> difference between markdown and textilize, besides textilize being a
> built-in Rails helper?
>
> Reinier
>
> Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ]Namens Eric Allen
> Verzonden: vrijdag 13 juni 2008 3:32
> Aan: [email protected]
> Onderwerp: [Tracks-discuss] textile() vs. markdown()
>
> 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
