Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

doc.replicated.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 53 posts

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#3

Post by jasonpeacock »

At first glance, there's a lot of words and not many examples. It's hard to quickly see what's different and special about this version of Markdown, other than "it's a formal subset of the other formats".

I see some examples for specific elements, but I'd love to see "here's an example demonstrating the problem(s) this addresses", and "here's the fixed version of that example".

There could be sub-sections of contrasting examples, like in coding style guides, showing the Old/New (Bad/Good?) styles.

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#4

Post by jtbayly »

gritzko wrote: post #2

The author is here, AMA.

> no arbitrary nesting

What are the restrictions? For example, I care about these (off the top of my head):

1. Can I nest a block quote in another block quote? 2. Can I nest a block quote in an (ordered or unordered) list? (And vice versa?) 3. Can I emphasize some text inside a strong? (and vice versa?)

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#5

Post by e12e »

It's a good effort, but I'm afraid it isn't a good fit for me, three things stand out:

1) the use of # rather than underline for headings. That why I feel you loose the beauty of the source form - headers disappear visually without a smart editor - if you demand a smart/wysiwyg editor anyway... Might just use a sgml/xml/html subset.

2) one symbol references. This strikes me as overly limiting - why not alphanumeric string - or at the very least any number string? It feels a bit strange to be forced to count 1,2...9,a - and not be able to things like a1, a2, b11.

3) "no way to put backticks inside a code span." So, no (full) examples of restricted markdown in codeblocks? Not to mention the many languages that use backticks?

I think you might be happier with reStructuredText than markdown: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReStructuredText

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#7

Post by gritzko »

jtbayly wrote: post #4
gritzko wrote: post #2

The author is here, AMA.

> no arbitrary nesting What are the restrictions? For example, I care about these (off the top of my head): 1. Can I nest a block quote in another block quote? 2. Can I nest a block quote in an (ordered or unordered) list? (And vice versa?) 3. Can I emphasize some text inside a strong? (and vice versa?)

Thanks for the question. "No arbitrary nesting" applies to inline formatting. Higher precedence formatting can be nested within lower. So, nothing can be nested within a code span, for example, as it is the highest. Just a way to order things.

Container blocks are nested arbitrarily, up to 16 levels. Quote > list > quote > code, for example, is OK.

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#8

Post by codethief »

> The unordered list markup symbol is a dash -. The other two Markdown options are * and +. But * is ambiguous and + is unpopular and there must be one way only!

THANK YOU for getting rid of the asterisk. As a former org-mode user it has always bugged me when people use the asterisk for lists, not headings. :)

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#9

Post by gritzko »

e12e wrote: post #5

It's a good effort, but I'm afraid it isn't a good fit for me, three things stand out: 1) the use of # rather than underline for headings. That why I feel you loose the beauty of the source form - headers disappear visually without a smart editor - if you demand a smart/wysiwyg editor anyway... Might just use a sgml/xml/html subset. 2) one symbol references. This strikes me as overly limiting - why not alphanumeric s…

3) That is for an inline code span only; can interrupt the span, put an escaped backtick, reopen the span. There is an example in the document. In fenced blocks, anything is accepted.

2) Yes, that mostly implies [1],[2]... pattern. Have to think of other solutions.

1) Well, yes. Aestetics is difficult to quantify. I use empty lines so headers stand out.

Re: StrictMark: Markdown, Refactored

#10

Post by codethief »

e12e wrote: post #5

It's a good effort, but I'm afraid it isn't a good fit for me, three things stand out: 1) the use of # rather than underline for headings. That why I feel you loose the beauty of the source form - headers disappear visually without a smart editor - if you demand a smart/wysiwyg editor anyway... Might just use a sgml/xml/html subset. 2) one symbol references. This strikes me as overly limiting - why not alphanumeric s…

> 1) the use of # rather than underline for headings.

While in theory I understand the appeal of the "WYSIWYG" syntax of underlining headings, in practice I've always found it less readable than expected. Consider, for instance:

    I am a paragraph belonging to the previous section but it looks like the heading belongs to me.


    I am a heading indicating a new section
    =======================================

    I am a paragraph belonging to the heading but the heading is weirdly separated from me.

    I am another paragraph belonging to the heading.
In some editors/IDE, the underline even gets highlighted / boldfaced, thereby exacerbating this effect.
Post reply on HN