in reply to Markdown syntax useful to the Monastery?
I approved and FP'd this node because I wanted to see some discussion about it. I don't necessarily support the use of Markdown, but I do think that some similar filter(s) would be a worthwhile addition. There are many out there and probably many of them have Perl implementations. I know about Text::Textile and Text::Tiki, for a couple examples.
I agree with others in that I believe, if implemented, the use of such should be configurable via user settings and should be off by default.
One reason why I think that Markdown might not be the right choice is that it wasn't created to solve the same right problems... From the Philosophy section of the Overview in the page describing Markdown's syntax:
Readability, however, is emphasized above all else. A Markdown-formatted document should be publishable as-is, as plain text, without looking like itís been marked up with tags or formatting instructions.I don't think we really care much about how PM nodes look in plaintext.
Some of the features I'd like would include:
Of course, maybe custom implementations for some of this stuff would be better than trying to adapt an existing formatting language too. So, whichever. Or none at all if there isn't enough interest. It isn't like we don't get by just fine as is.
Does anyone have any reasons why this kind of thing should not be implememented? I mean, assuming a clean integration with the current syntax could be accomplished? I can't really think of one outside of a "little gain for the effort" argument.
-sauoq "My two cents aren't worth a dime.";
|Replies are listed 'Best First'.|
Re^2: Markdown syntax useful to the Monestary?
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Oct 28, 2005 at 21:34 UTC