Sean, I don't think there is any conflict between having Pillar and Markdown support inside Pharo. I tried to explain myself as many times as I can, but time and again when Markdown gets mentioned, the next is "we already have Pillar" and then a holy war restarts because someone wants another markup system supported. All the old arguments for Pillar are mentioned and all about (Pandoc's) Markdown ignored and we, the community, rinse an repeat as a broken record.
At least this time I know about support existing CommonMark. So maybe in 100 to 1000 iterations more of the above community cycle, we could have a versatile playground supporting at least two documentation markup systems and will be closer to a rich text/document editor system on Pharo. Cheers, Offray On 30/12/17 14:58, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > Stephane Ducasse-3 wrote >> Pillar is not about syntax but about the text model and all the visitors. > Ah! Good to know. I was also confused on this point. Since we don't yet have > a rich text editor, I only ever see static markup and static exports. I > should take a deeper look. > > That said, is there really a conflict with what Offray is saying/doing? IIUC > he wants to create a Markdown parser, which presumable could be used to > import into the Pillar model (I would assume when the tools become > attractive enough to encourage this) and back out to Markdown for > interoperability, no? Or am I missing something? > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > >
