I had similar idea and created MDwiki in 2013 (now unmaintained): https://dynalon.github.io/mdwiki/#!index.md
We should have Markdown-rendered websites
171–180 of 351 posts
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#172If Google upranked “documents” (simple HTML content without JavaScript), then there would be an incentive to publish simple content. Instead Google goes to insane lengths to parse JavaScript generated abominations, and otherwise allow/encourage shitty content.
Which search engines do not execute JavaScript codes?
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#173No post body was provided.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#174I get a 429 error.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#175There's Gopher, Gemini, a myriad of static site generators that render markdown... I like the idea of my browser rendering markdown. But it's not going to solve the problem, as long as the same client application that renders documents can also render web applications, people looking to bait you with a document into running software on your machine will just publish web applications with some text inside of interest…
A good summary.
People forget what the M in HTML stood for.
The slow drift of Hypertext from nice separation of document markup and presentation to "web applications" and browsers that are mini operating systems makes those old jokes about Emacs pale in comparison.
The modern bloat-ware browser is a calamity of code, most of which I have no use for and no trust in. So I use a text based browser without JavaScript - and I love it!
If I want to run your code on my machine I'll install a proper application that has at least been through some basic code signing, packaging and secure distribution channels.
Gemini seems like one of the few hopes for breaking away from the madness of "Web" and restoring some sort of sane, plain document publishing for ordinary people to read and share information.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly, your comment is very similar to the Gemini FAQ "2.9 Why didn't you just use Markdown instead of defining text/gemini?" [1] [1] https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi
https://xkcd.com/927/
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#177I've seen a few people on here recommending everything from "just use HTML" (which misses the point) to "just use Gemini" (which misses the point even more). Why not HTML? Why not Markdown? They aren't self-contained. * A web page written in either format can leak your IP address to external bad actors because of the way inline images work. * Loading resources from more than one server is a reliability and security p…
Self-containment is entirely unrelated to a format. You could do self-contained markdown, HTML or anything else if you wanted to.
Of course it's related to the format. Many formats, like PNG and Gemtext, are inherently self-contained, while other formats, like HTML and SVG, are not.
Annoyingly, EPUB isn't inherently self-contained [1], but external access is explicitly optional [2], and it does make self-containment easier, because you can reuse resources across multiple pages, whereas HTML requires you to either duplicate the resources across multiple pages, or you have to build your thing as a single massive HTML page.
[1]: https://www.w3.org/TR/epub/#sec-resource-locations
[2]: https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-rs/#sec-epub-rs-network-access
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#178Me buying the domain name react-markdown.com and the github repo "react-markdown"
...
PROFIT !!!
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#179Me buying the domain name react-markdown.com and the github repo "react-markdown" ... PROFIT !!!
Damn! Already too late !
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#180People are "big-picture" missing why this is an important idea. I had a prof put it like this once: The great tragedy of the web is the following: HTML made the web easy to read. But you know what made the web easy to write? Facebook. Facebook was undeniably the technology that made it so that roughly everybody could write things on the web to be read by everyone. I really like the direction of this, because it point…
This is nonsense. There were tons of things that made the web easy to write before FB. That is not what made FB successful. It was a combination of a lot of little features plus the big innovation that your profile had to be your real life identity early on. That was the thing prior social networks didn't do. It enabled the uniquely Facebook experience of being able to find past friends and more distant family.
> It enabled the uniquely Facebook experience of being able to find past friends and more distant family.
This came afterwards. In the beginning it was just a showcase of life moments to share with others. Lots of fun and lots of cringe.