I also ended up using Markdown to create a blogging platform[0] for my website. It has many benefits as it's a popular format, so you can for example edit and see the result directly inside VSCode.
We should have Markdown-rendered websites
341–350 of 351 posts
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#342This misses the real point of Markdown, which isn't to be simple or opinionated but to be readable by the end user in both forms (raw or rendered). In case of a web site there is never the expectation of the source being easy to read for the end user. If you want to create a simple page – great, go for it. The only minor change will be replacing markdown tags with HTML ones. And there's plenty of tooling which does t…
> of the source being easy to read for the end user
But the source is easier to read for you (the author), directly in your code editor or even simply edit the file live on the server via FTP or SSH.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fatal flaw of HTML (and XML for that matter) is that the tags have the same visual weight as the text they're delimiting, which makes for a sense of clutter even in your minimal example. Markdown really scores here, by having a pleasing plain text representation as a goal from the outset, and I've love to see it used more widely for web pages. I'd also love to see it more widely used for offline reading, too - th…
Markdown is undoubtedly more readable, but HTML can be more readable than most people make it. And considering that the ultimate goal is to wind up with a layed-out, styled document, its capabilities in that regard are just plain-old more important, especially since markdown isn't going to replace WYSIWYG editors any time soon, and almost everybody who needs to know HTML can learn it relatively easily. Browsers colla…
The problem is that this only really works well for "documents". Most webpages are anything but "documents", even those that do mostly focus on text.
Of course, HTML templating can help a lot with that: adding footers and sidebars and so on. But it's still no good for "web apps".
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that CommonMark has its own very annoying things. Like loose lists. Multiple lists of bullet points ends up an ugly mess with CommonMark.
Good thing about a standard is you just bring those issues up there.
Many have. Bringing an issue up doesn't mean something gets changed....
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that CommonMark has its own very annoying things. Like loose lists. Multiple lists of bullet points ends up an ugly mess with CommonMark.
"I don't like this standard" is not the same as "there is no standard".
I didn't say there wasn't a standard. Just because there is a standard doesn't mean it works well. Hence the whole "more than one standard" situation...
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that CommonMark has its own very annoying things. Like loose lists. Multiple lists of bullet points ends up an ugly mess with CommonMark.
Can you give me an example?
This is in ObsidianMD, which uses CommonMark.
If you have two lists separated by only new lines: https://imgur.com/IFejJvX
They render as loose lists (note the ugly spacing that appears) regardless of the number of new lines between them: https://imgur.com/VEiAZKV
The workaround is adding a tab (or other character, like a braille space) between the lists, which really makes them one list: https://imgur.com/Z5WLy6w
Which makes it render in a less worse way: https://imgur.com/F5lc0ek
This is expected behavior per CommonMark.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#347I wonder why nobody has created a netflix based on Torrent search.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fatal flaw of HTML (and XML for that matter) is that the tags have the same visual weight as the text they're delimiting, which makes for a sense of clutter even in your minimal example. Markdown really scores here, by having a pleasing plain text representation as a goal from the outset, and I've love to see it used more widely for web pages. I'd also love to see it more widely used for offline reading, too - th…
Markdown is undoubtedly more readable, but HTML can be more readable than most people make it. And considering that the ultimate goal is to wind up with a layed-out, styled document, its capabilities in that regard are just plain-old more important, especially since markdown isn't going to replace WYSIWYG editors any time soon, and almost everybody who needs to know HTML can learn it relatively easily. Browsers colla…
One problem with this style is that if you copy any text from this website you will have trailing spaces after each paragraph. To avoid that you have to close the tags (or open the next one) directly after the text.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
Markdown is undoubtedly more readable, but HTML can be more readable than most people make it. And considering that the ultimate goal is to wind up with a layed-out, styled document, its capabilities in that regard are just plain-old more important, especially since markdown isn't going to replace WYSIWYG editors any time soon, and almost everybody who needs to know HTML can learn it relatively easily. Browsers colla…
The problem is that this only really works well for "documents". Most webpages are anything but "documents", even those that do mostly focus on text. Of course, HTML templating can help a lot with that: adding footers and sidebars and so on. But it's still no good for "web apps".
Compared to markdown I think HTML works a lot better as a general purpose format.
Re: We should have Markdown-rendered websites
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
Markdown is undoubtedly more readable, but HTML can be more readable than most people make it. And considering that the ultimate goal is to wind up with a layed-out, styled document, its capabilities in that regard are just plain-old more important, especially since markdown isn't going to replace WYSIWYG editors any time soon, and almost everybody who needs to know HTML can learn it relatively easily. Browsers colla…
One problem with this style is that if you copy any text from this website you will have trailing spaces after each paragraph. To avoid that you have to close the tags (or open the next one) directly after the text.
Sure, if a trailing space in copied/paste functionality or precise :after placement is important then you'd need to modify the ending tag placement... but prioritizing that use case seems like a premature optimization. I don't think that makes a drastic difference. Compared to markdown, you've still got a heck of a lot more formatting flexibility without changing the rendered product.