On Feb 18, 2008 5:59 PM, Andrea Censi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 18, 2008 2:31 PM, Petite Abeille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Has anyone considered writing a formal specification for Markdown? > > Yes, it's called Markdown.pl <g>.
I have to respectfully disagree. Mr. Gruber himself has said a few times on this list that just because markdown.pl does something doesn't mean it's right. In fact, my recollection is that he indicated the syntax rules are the final authority and that markdown.pl fails in some instances. Interestingly, most of the "direct ports" fail in those same instances. Sorry, I can't recall any specific example at this time as I don't use one of those "direct ports." Of course, the problem is that the syntax rules are a little vague from time to time and in some instances are open to multiple interpretations. However, given the philosophy behind why J.G. created Markdown, I don't know that such a strict specification is desirable in this instance. If you search the archives, you'll find previous discussions on this. -- ---- Waylan Limberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss