I'll have to be one of the first to oppose the idea. Looking at the syntax for the system, it just looks plain ugly to me. There are times I wish to use asterisks in regular text; if those start being translated into emphasis tags, I will be disappointed. Plus, what kind of syntax is [my homenode](/?node_id=340501) for linking? [saskaqueer|my homenode] beats that out anyday (it also beats out [my homenode](saskaqueer) if it would be possible to get it working as such).

How hard is it to remember <p> tags for paragraphs? I can't stand forums that autoformat text for you (ie: one RETURN key equals one <br /> tag). It's even worse when they combine html with autoformating -- where you wind up with huge gaps of space between paragraphs if you use <p> tags and separate blocks with newlines (as I do here on pm).

Things work very well here; a lot of work has gone into making perlmonks's formatting/coding specs work as well as they do. Don't mess with them. Of course, if this madness should make it through, I have high hopes that this Markdown system would of course not be turned on by default and would only be accessible via an option in user settings. But of course, my ability to see into the future has shown me that I have nothing to worry about :)

In reply to Re: Markdown syntax useful to the Monestary? by saskaqueer
in thread Markdown syntax useful to the Monastery? by radiantmatrix

Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":