Live data from Hacker News

Whats Wrong with Markdown

adamhyde.net

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#21

Markdown has basically kinda won the Plain Text Format War but man sometimes I really wish it had used the "enclose text between slashes" format for /italics/. Enclosing text between asterisks is for bold . Enclosing text between two asterisks before and after is for... what? Who writes that out in plain text areas? Nobody. Nobody except Gruber.

> Who writes that out in plain text areas? Nobody. Nobody except Gruber.

I do this. Reading through my recent comments on [Website X] concludes that I use it as kind of an "italics" tag even though there IS markdown on that very website. I guess it becomes more pronounced.

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#22

Markdown has basically kinda won the Plain Text Format War but man sometimes I really wish it had used the "enclose text between slashes" format for /italics/. Enclosing text between asterisks is for bold . Enclosing text between two asterisks before and after is for... what? Who writes that out in plain text areas? Nobody. Nobody except Gruber.

> Who writes that out in plain text areas? Nobody. Nobody except Gruber. I do this. Reading through my recent comments on [Website X] concludes that I use it as kind of an "italics" tag even though there IS markdown on that very website. I guess it becomes more pronounced.

I think tho that Markdown hasnt won the plain text battle - plain text has. Only a very small percentage of plain text docs are markdown...so small it wouldn't even count...

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#23

hi, Adam here, I wrote the article. Really interesting comments. Just for the record, I am in favor of the command line tool, and I have also posted numerous articles on better alternatives :)

No offense meant, but your blog seems like a punchbag you use whenever you're mad with a technology or it doesn't fit your use cases. Going through some random articles feels like hearing someone bitching about random things when in bad mood. I don't see much value in that: [1] http://www.adamhyde.net/why-github-is-bad-for-open-source/ [2] http://www.adamhyde.net/markdown-ugh/

I'd suggest some things here:

* Do not post; wait. I don't know what was going on when you wrote [2], but you were clearly not in a mood to write anything constructive. Maybe you should have skipped [2] and only write your second article about markdown (not that I really agree with it either (see below), but at least it is developed).

* I don't really see the point in complaining alone. Maybe you should look for alternatives, and post them along with your complains. Or if you don't know any and don't want/have time to look for one, ask people (I don't know if you can easily add things like discuss on Ghost). For [1], I think you would like GitLab, for example.

Honestly, after reading your article about markdown (the long one), I don't feel like reading any other of your articles. Not that it's bad, but I waited the whole article for some things that never came[], and ended up feeling like I wasted my time there: I just listened to someone complaining about something (mainly about being bad for doing things it's not really meant to do), and nothing else. So now I expect to experience the same with any of your articles (and I'm probably wrong), and I may be missing some great things. [] I was expecting some kind of "solution". Alternatives? Anything?

~

About the article:

You complain about markdown, but use Ghost for your blog (or can you write blog posts with something else on Ghost? Didn't see any from their home page). You never mention any alternative.

Maybe because there isn't many that are:

* easy to read without being parsed, with most of the syntax being somewhat explicit

* can be used to produce "clean" html

* widely used (with some flavors but mainly the same syntax)

And that's markdown (to me at least). It's not here to replace html, MS Word, etc. More like replacing bbcode and other ugly syntaxes. You sound like you'd rather use plain html, but do you? Would anyone rather use plain html than markdown (when available) for writing simple formatted text? (well yes, some would.. xD)

Markdown could greatly benefit from standardization, though. That was the one valid point in your article, imho. It's sad but I haven't seen many big differences anyway, except: * some space differences (line breakings, etc.), but no change in the meaning of the syntax * lists must be preceded by an empty line on some parsers * custom syntax for additional parsing (images, etc.) but well, that's not really a problem with markdown, more like a problem with ghost-flavored (or anythingelse-flavored) markdown

It's not perfect, and still wouldn't be even if standardized (but would be much closer); but I see no better alternative. And neither do you, seemingly. (so no, I did not find your "numerous articles on better alternatives" =/)

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#24
post #23

hi, Adam here, I wrote the article. Really interesting comments. Just for the record, I am in favor of the command line tool, and I have also posted numerous articles on better alternatives :)

No offense meant, but your blog seems like a punchbag you use whenever you're mad with a technology or it doesn't fit your use cases. Going through some random articles feels like hearing someone bitching about random things when in bad mood. I don't see much value in that: [1] http://www.adamhyde.net/why-github-is-bad-for-open-source/ [2] http://www.adamhyde.net/markdown-ugh/ I'd suggest some things here: * Do not p…

haha :) yeah, the last few weeks scratched a few itches, thats for sure! But on the whole Im a positive chap and the posts are positive or (gasp) tongue in cheek :) Don't take it so personally! Thanks for your points, hope you do read some more of the blog but no worries if not.

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#25
I agree with the author in general. However, I would write an article about a more general and insidious fashion (fashion repeats itself). That fashion is "I hate typing" or, alternatively, "typing less makes me more productive." Guess what; it doesn't. Here's why.

If you're using programming slang to make yourself more productive, then you're not programming. You're a boiler-plate code generator. Therefore you could be replaced by a program or DSL that a more adept programmer could write. Stop using slanguages and start thinking about what and how you're coding. You'll become a better programmer. Quit trying to fool yourself that syntactic sugar and shortcuts are a valid development paradigm. You'll become a better project manager.

I abhor things like CoffeeScript and Markdown and various metalanguages, because they are speciously productive at first. You type less and get the same result. Great! However, most coding actually requires some thought and the logic and structures don't simply fly off your fingers. It comes slowly and these slanguages stop being useful at this point. So you take the time and effort to learn a modified, non-standard syntax that stops paying off once you get to the core of your task.

I hate to think of how many wasted programming man-hours non-standardized formats have produced.

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#26

I agree with the author in general. However, I would write an article about a more general and insidious fashion (fashion repeats itself). That fashion is "I hate typing" or, alternatively, "typing less makes me more productive." Guess what; it doesn't. Here's why. If you're using programming slang to make yourself more productive, then you're not programming. You're a boiler-plate code generator. Therefore you could…

I think that the original post and your comment both miss the point in a big way. You are upset at all the people who use markdown and think they are coders. Do you really think such a sample of people exists? Where exactly? Nobody can say that with a serious face and anybody who's into learning markdown has at least enough knowledge to know that.

Use case for markdown: when I build website (by hand, writing pure HTML-CSS-JS on my text editor of choice), adding the copy can be a chore. If I write it in markdown, or ask people to write it in markdown, or reprocess whatever they send me in a markdown editor with html output (I.e. Byword), I save a ton of time by producing a very simple html text block I just need to copy and paste where needed.

Second use case: when I wrote my degree thesis I chose to do that with a normal text processing software (Pages on the Mac). When I had to put it online, I simply copied it inside a markdown editor coupled with a previewer (Marked) and I quickly wrote a couple of scripts to convert footnotes (supported by hyper markdown). Half a day later I had my chapters in a format that I was able to quickly turn into html blocks for my website and convert to ePub with Pandoc. Markdown saved me hours of work.

Third use case: whenever I write a post for the web publications I work for, I write it in markdown with Byword, because it gives me a good distraction-free writing environment and the ability to send my editors (that being myself, sometimes) a perfectly fit HTML a version of the article. When I write articles, I want to focus on writing the article, not writing even the simplest HTML.

Last, but not least, the guy seems to willfully ignore the plethora of very good markdown editors (with incredible support to HTML conversion) out there.

This is why the article sounded more like a bitter rant, than a thought critique.

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who writes that out in plain text areas? Nobody. Nobody except Gruber. I do this. Reading through my recent comments on [Website X] concludes that I use it as kind of an "italics" tag even though there IS markdown on that very website. I guess it becomes more pronounced.

I think tho that Markdown hasnt won the plain text battle - plain text has. Only a very small percentage of plain text docs are markdown...so small it wouldn't even count...

Reddit, Stack Overflow, GitHub/BitBucket (readmes, tickets, wikis), and it's also used by a couple of CMSs, blog platforms, and static website generators.

Virtually all of the text I write is Markdown. Even this very comment is written in a subset of Markdown (and so is yours).

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#28
post #3

> Markdown (.MD) is a text format that lazy people use to write HTML. Markdown is a markup language for relatively simple structured documents. You can convert it to HTML, but you could as well convert it to something else. > However that is where the use case ends. .MD is not a useful format for many other cases unless you want to prove to the programmers that you too can do tricky stuff in plain text. For the rest…

I'd disagree that regular users don't have any problems with it.

One very common problem I've seen is a conversation like "How old are you?" "21." which Markdown interprets '21.' as a list and renumbers from 1, leading to: "How old are you?" "1."

Another problem is that single linebreaks are ignored. Things like song lyrics and ASCII art get messed up, and some people even use single linebreaks for paragraphs. And even if you do use two linebreaks for paragraphs, there's still the problem that copy/pasting text will eliminate paragraph breaks since they're copy/pasted as one linebreak.

I could go on, but the point is that Markdown is honestly not a very user-friendly way to format text on a discussion website.

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#29
Adam I completely agree. Markdown is fantastic at something. That something is non-complex documents. What has happened since is that techies have taken that non-complex use case for the tech and made the logical leap that it is somehow a leas complex tool for complex cases. In other words "average users will understand this". The average user likely will for the most basic case and then will be thrust upon a poorly standardized, often needlessly complex hash of a markup extension set for anything more complex. All of this energy at the expense of HTML gaining more users and or web based WYSIWYGs being refined to the point of awesomeness.

Re: Whats Wrong with Markdown

#30
post #8

First of all, I reject the premise of this article: > Markdown (.MD) is a text format that lazy people use to write HTML. This is just blatantly false. Markdown was never intended to replace HTML. Second, the author points how how "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog " is not very legible. I completely agree. However, this is contrived example that you are unlikely to encounter in practice. Just as it would b…

hi Argh. My reply got burned by the server downtime. Just to say I dont have anything against the shell and plain text- I produced (facilitated) the production of numerous books around this topic including http://www.flossmanuals.net/command-line/ Glad you like reading markdown. I don't think that is a majority position though and I see markdown being promoted to a larger community at times that really wouldn't find…

Any plain-text based format is, in the end, maximally at least as readable as plain-text. Any kind of markup in it will generally diminish readability. Markdown is very close to being just plain text, but with a very short path to HTML markup -- you just start typing HTML in.

So yes, people will enjoy reading Markdown in at least as much as they do plain text. And yes, the implementation quirks will be annoying for anyone using it. But I don't see how all these add up to a larger argument against Markdown.

Post reply on HN