On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Jason Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Waylan Limberg wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Jason Blevins >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > I couldn't find any discussion of it on the list, but here's the >> > changelog entry: >> > >> > 1.0.2b2 - 20 Mar 2005 >> > >> > + Experimental support for [this] as a synonym for [this][]. >> >> Interestingly, this a completely different use for single-bracketed >> text than I use and see on a daily basis. As I mentioned before, I see >> it more as a shortcut footnote type syntax for links only when text is >> expected to be read in plain text format. > > Thats a good point--I wasn't making the distinction before. Using > numbers in brackets like so [1] is definitely a common notation for > footnotes. I use it myself in emails but I didn't make the connection. > It's also common for math and engineering journals to use that notation > for references.
Just to be clear, I'm not at all suggesting that markdown should adopt [1] at an alternate syntax for [^1]. I only ever use it for links in emails. I don't believe I said anything diferant than that, and no-one thus far seems to think I was, but I wanted to close that door before anyone opens it. > > Interestingly, that's how peg-markdown (with extensions via -x) renders > footnotes. Instead of the link being a superscript '1', you get '[1]'. > I actually like that better for the web I think. Superscripts are nice > in print, but there you don't have to click on them. I have seen that before, and I have mixed feeling about it. It's a little easier to see them, but they also detract from reading the main text a little more than a superscript. Of course, they don't bother me in plain text emails, so it's no big deal. -- ---- Waylan Limberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
