Hi, What are the pros?
About the cons: maybe we need to look more into the requirements. I am looking at https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2048 and the one that concerns me a little is 2.2.6: I guess somebody would need to write a bit of docs about security concerns. Or you can go the way Markdown did it: from https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7763#section-2 "Security considerations: Markdown interpreted as plain text is relatively harmless. A text editor need only display the text. The editor SHOULD take care to handle control characters appropriately and to limit the effect of the Markdown to the text-editing area itself; malicious Unicode- based Markdown could, for example, surreptitiously change the directionality of the text. An editor for normal text would already take these control characters into consideration, however. Markdown interpreted as a precursor to other formats, such as HTML, carries all of the security considerations as the target formats. For example, HTML can contain instructions to execute scripts, redirect the user to other web pages, download remote content, and upload personally identifiable information. Markdown also can contain islands of formal markup, such as HTML. These islands of formal markup may be passed as they are, transformed, or ignored (perhaps because the islands are conditional or incompatible) when the Markdown is processed. Since Markdown may have different interpretations depending on the tool and the environment, a better approach is to analyze (and sanitize or block) the output markup, rather than attempting to analyze the Markdown. " Do they have an org-babel? Thanks, Andrea