Re: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Styling Markdown approaches
I would argue that the syntax should be extended to take markdown=2 etc to parse MD to the depth of two levels etc until markdown=true for infinite recursive parsing. Like that, a complex table could get markdown=true or the html tag could get the recursive parameter. Regards, jakov ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Styling Markdown approaches
The reason there are Aleph{null} implementations is that while good, it
hasn't been good enough to keep people from just inserting raw html when
they ran into a limit.
If I followed the letter of the syntax rules, there would be no point in my
using markdown. EVERYTHING in my pages is in a div. The top level
description of my pages is
http://Sherwoods-Forests.com
780-848-2548
50042 Range Rd 31
Warburg, Alberta T0C 2T0
On 20 April 2013 16:05, Waylan Limberg wrote:
> I think the syntax rules regarding raw html [1] shed some light on this
> issue:
>
> > Markdown is not a replacement for HTML, or even close
> > to it. Its syntax is very small, corresponding only to a very
> > small subset of HTML tags. The idea is not to create a
> > syntax that makes it easier to insert HTML tags. In my
> > opinion, HTML tags are already easy to insert. The idea
> > for Markdown is to make it easy to read, write, and edit
> > prose. HTML is a publishing format; Markdown is a writing
> > format. Thus, Markdown’s formatting syntax only addresses
> > issues that can be conveyed in plain text.
> >
> > For any markup that is not covered by Markdown’s syntax,
> > you simply use HTML itself. There’s no need to preface it
> > or delimit it to indicate that you’re switching from Markdown
> > to HTML; you just use the tags.
>
> In other words, if you want a *publishing* format, use raw HTML. If
> you want to wrap some text in a div to add styling hooks, fine. But if
> you want to format the contents of that div, then use HTML for that
> also. After all, "Markdown is not a replacement for HTML."
>
> Yes, some markdown implementations have added some optional extras,
> but those extras generally fit into the philosophy quoted above (see
> definition lists). That said, I have seen some pretty horrid requests
> for extending the syntax as the maintainer of the Python-Markdown
> project (which has an extensive API for writing extensions). While I
> agree that user defined extensions are an appropriate way to go, one
> should always be careful when introducing new syntax. John
> MacFarlane's FAQ [2] is evidence of that.
>
> [1]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html
> [2]: http://johnmacfarlane.net/babelmark2/faq.html
>
> --
>
> \X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\|
> Waylan Limberg
> ___
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Styling Markdown approaches
I think the syntax rules regarding raw html [1] shed some light on this issue: > Markdown is not a replacement for HTML, or even close > to it. Its syntax is very small, corresponding only to a very > small subset of HTML tags. The idea is not to create a > syntax that makes it easier to insert HTML tags. In my > opinion, HTML tags are already easy to insert. The idea > for Markdown is to make it easy to read, write, and edit > prose. HTML is a publishing format; Markdown is a writing > format. Thus, Markdown’s formatting syntax only addresses > issues that can be conveyed in plain text. > > For any markup that is not covered by Markdown’s syntax, > you simply use HTML itself. There’s no need to preface it > or delimit it to indicate that you’re switching from Markdown > to HTML; you just use the tags. In other words, if you want a *publishing* format, use raw HTML. If you want to wrap some text in a div to add styling hooks, fine. But if you want to format the contents of that div, then use HTML for that also. After all, "Markdown is not a replacement for HTML." Yes, some markdown implementations have added some optional extras, but those extras generally fit into the philosophy quoted above (see definition lists). That said, I have seen some pretty horrid requests for extending the syntax as the maintainer of the Python-Markdown project (which has an extensive API for writing extensions). While I agree that user defined extensions are an appropriate way to go, one should always be careful when introducing new syntax. John MacFarlane's FAQ [2] is evidence of that. [1]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html [2]: http://johnmacfarlane.net/babelmark2/faq.html -- \X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\| Waylan Limberg ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Styling Markdown approaches
On 20 April 2013 16:43, Paul Wilson wrote: > you make to the values, the output may look somewhat different, but broken? > That seems a bit harsh. My markdown doesn't have this option and this is what it looks like: http://s.natalian.org/2013-04-20/1366474134_1366x768.png Yes you can probably parse the content, but it looks broken to everyone else. Doesn't compare to HTML's "degrade gracefully" paradigm. > In fact you can likely change the the output by using a different library. > As the discussions here illustrate, there is no bible for Markdown, just a > number of similar but usually not identical options. If you want to change > the appearance, changing the CSS is another option. Er, it's really hard to id and class markdown without support for example. Perhaps I've misunderstood you. I did find the markdown + options analogy to html + css pretty awful. > A config file suits my personal preference for packages, so I'd probably use > one happily, but I recognise that others will differ. In the end I rarely > use Markdown, but I have incorporated some of the ideas that I've seen into > the system that I prefer - and that's driven by a configuration file. I think you are totally missing the interoperability argument here. It might be great for you, but if you are investing a lot of effort into putting stuff in markdown, you need interoperability. Just imagine if say the markdown corpus of German laws https://github.com/bundestag/gesetze forked markdown so much you needed their special interpreter in order to read it easily? That would be ridiculous. I'm already super pissed that neither Debian's default markdown, nor pagedown nor https://github.com/Gottox/smu supports . I guess I'll work around it, by keeping to the lowest common denominator, and accommodate different styled sections differently (spawn new pagedown textarea and preview) in my silly editor tool thingie: word sister. https://github.com/kaihendry/wordsister Kind regards, ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Styling Markdown approaches
With respect to Aristotle Pagaltzis, I have to disagree, at least in part. Markdown is two things - a document format and some code to process text written in Markdown format into a different format, often HTML. Using a configuration file to adjust the actions of the code seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable approach, and I can't see how it will result in broken documents. Depending on what the config file holds, and what changes you make to the values, the output may look somewhat different, but broken? That seems a bit harsh. In fact you can likely change the the output by using a different library. As the discussions here illustrate, there is no bible for Markdown, just a number of similar but usually not identical options. If you want to change the appearance, changing the CSS is another option. A config file suits my personal preference for packages, so I'd probably use one happily, but I recognise that others will differ. In the end I rarely use Markdown, but I have incorporated some of the ideas that I've seen into the system that I prefer - and that's driven by a configuration file. Regards, Paul -- "Software - secure, cheap, quick - choose any two" ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Styling Markdown approaches
I love standards. There are so many to choose from. Yes the core of MD is similar. But there are enough edge cases that you cannot count on being able to take MD from one location and using it at another. I would prefer to be able to control this behaviour either with a configuration file, or inline material, rather than having to edit the markup for each file itself. Doing it inline, means that in theory for each tweak there is a configuation value that follows the 'standard' (such as it isn't) and a value for the tweak. In the archives of this list there are records of many items discussing where Gruber's spec was ambiguous.And the canonical code doesn't make html that validates, as loose tags are surrounded by tags. Fork my own? I've done that. I have the older CPAN version of MMD and have hacked the default value of the markdown flag so that it is 1 all the time. It's a crummy hack. I have to redo it every time I update my CPAN library for a new version of Perl. I write web pages. I went to MD because it minimized the amount of repetitive markup I was doing. Will it bite me? Quite possibly. But my MD files are not public access. It's actually worse than that, because for me MMD is actually a module in Template Toolkit. So my information is MD markup wrapped in a preface and epilog of template toolkit. Included file in the TT portion create my static menu. Portable? No. But the result is a static page, without javascript (except for google analytics) that loads blindingly fast, and allows me to use a shared server without worrying about CPU contention. But it would be a 3 hour hack to write a script to strip the TT wrapper off, another hack to explicityly put in the markdown=1 flags. But meanwhile I have cleaner looking markup. However, I won't try to convert anyone. Several people have spoken eloquently that this is a Bad Thing (tm) and no one has agreed. I must abide by the Will of the People, and withdraw to the Cave of the Curmudgeons. Respectfully, Sherwood of Sherwood's Forests Sherwood Botsford Sherwood's Forests -- http://Sherwoods-Forests.com 780-848-2548 50042 Range Rd 31 Warburg, Alberta T0C 2T0 On 19 April 2013 20:22, Michel Fortin wrote: > Le 19-avr.-2013 à 17:00, Sherwood Botsford a écrit > : > > > That particular cat is out of the bag, however, and we have a score of > > implementations. From all apparent discussion here, there is no > particular > > urge for the writers to get together to reduce the implementations. So > we > > have 20 document formats already. And not all the implementers are > > concerned with backward compatibility. > > > > The same can be said of html and CSS. CSS configures how the html is > > rendered. So CMD could configure the way MD is rendered. > > CSS doesn't change how the HTML is parsed, only how it looks (and sometime > how it behaves). Similarly, configuration options in a Markdown parser that > let you adjust *the output* to your linking are very welcome. > > As for all the implementations, they mostly vary in edge cases and in > their extensions to the core syntax. The core Markdown syntax (as defined > by John Gruber) is pretty much the same everywhere, and this includes how > HTML blocks are parsed. Implementations doing things differently than core > Markdown are doing it mostly by adding restrictions out of security > concerns with user-generated content. > > By the way, if you really feel like it you should go ahead and hack your > preferred implementation to do what you want. Just keep in mind that your > documents using this tweaked syntax feature won't work right with other > implementations. This might or might not come to bite you in the future > depending on what you intend to do with those documents. > > > -- > Michel Fortin > michel.for...@michelf.ca > http://michelf.ca/ > > ___ > Markdown-Discuss mailing list > Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss > ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
