On Wed, 2024-05-15 at 15:57 +0100, Darac Marjal wrote: > On 15/05/2024 03:17, Max Nikulin wrote: > > > On 15/05/2024 02:32, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > > > > > > > Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > The only sensible interpretation I can > > > come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being > > > placed around text that's supposed to be emphasized/italicized. > > > > > > *Bold*, /italics/, and _underlined_ markup is supported by various > > mailers, e.g. Thunderbird and Gnus. Some render superscripts^1 and > > subscripts_2 as well. > > > > Backticks (`echo $PATH`) are more specific to markdown. However > > sometimes I use them not expecting that the message will be rendered as > > markdown. Just to avoid ambiguity where a piece of code starts and ends. > > > > When this sort of subject comes up (as it does, every so often), I > wonder why `text/markdown` isn't offered as a mime type for sending > emails. If you're an MUA and you're going to parse text/plain for > markup, then why not offer text/markdown as the body of the message? I > know that there have been various attempts to bridge the gap between > "text/plain is too basic" and "text/html is too powerful" such as > text/enriched and text/rtf, but Markdown seems to be hitting a sweet > spot of being easy to write and being widely adopted elsewhere.
Evolution delivers on a markdown option.\ Cheers!