Re: Collaboration made simple with bracket notation
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 23:41 -0800, david parsons wrote:
> I'm fairly late to the game (and I wrote a C markdown before I
> started reading this list, so I'm not exactly in the mainstream) but
> the syntax described on humanized seems incredibly noisy. Wouldn't
> the editorial corrections markup fit better as a footnote?
>
> I'd think that something like [text](ed: change -- why), like so:
>
>They called to say that [they're](ed: was `their` -- be
>careful with "their" and "they're") coming over in
>[a](ed: was `an` -- `an` is only before a vowel) quarter-hour.
>
> might be a little more readable than the thicket of []'s that
> Mr. Raskin proposed.
I like this variation:
They called to say that the{-ir}{+y're}{be careful with "their" and
"they're"} coming over in a{-n}{`an` is only before a vowel}
quarter-hour.
Also for author names and dates: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-04}
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Collaboration made simple with bracket notation
> On Jan 21, 2008, at 8:49 AM, tchomby wrote: > > > What do people think of this? > > > > http://www.humanized.com/weblog/2006/06/30/collaboration_made_simple_with_bracket_notation/ On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 09:31:04AM -0500, Fletcher T. Penney wrote: > It's an interesting idea - as mentioned in the comments the brackets > would need to be changed to something else that doesn't collide with > current (or future) Markdown syntax, but I like the concept. I'm fairly late to the game (and I wrote a C markdown before I started reading this list, so I'm not exactly in the mainstream) but the syntax described on humanized seems incredibly noisy. Wouldn't the editorial corrections markup fit better as a footnote? I'd think that something like [text](ed: change -- why), like so: They called to say that [they're](ed: was `their` -- be careful with "their" and "they're") coming over in [a](ed: was `an` -- `an` is only before a vowel) quarter-hour. might be a little more readable than the thicket of []'s that Mr. Raskin proposed. -david parsons ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Re: Collaboration made simple with bracket notation
It's an interesting idea - as mentioned in the comments the brackets would need to be changed to something else that doesn't collide with current (or future) Markdown syntax, but I like the concept. I've had several MMD users who collaborated on documents and tried to avoid using Word for its annotation features. I added in a custom feature so that Scrivener users could use it's annotation feature to insert comments, but it doesn't have a deletion/addition syntax. I could consider adding something like this to MultiMarkdown, but would rather wait to ensure that the chosen syntax was compatible with whatever Gruber has planned for Markdown. Fletcher On Jan 21, 2008, at 8:49 AM, tchomby wrote: What do people think of this? http://www.humanized.com/weblog/2006/06/30/collaboration_made_simple_with_bracket_notation/ -- Fletcher T. Penney [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think that's how Chicago got started. A bunch of people in New York said, 'Gee, I'm enjoying the crime and the poverty, but it just isn't cold enough. Let's go west.' - Richard Jeni smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
Collaboration made simple with bracket notation
What do people think of this? http://www.humanized.com/weblog/2006/06/30/collaboration_made_simple_with_bracket_notation/ -- Find out how you can get spam free email. http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3 ___ Markdown-Discuss mailing list Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
