here are some opinions; take 'em or leave 'em.
we might eventually have as many "standard"
editions of markdown as we now have flavors.
that should make things twice as fun as before.
***
any spec without an accompanying converter is
all talk and no action; the proof is in the pudding.
***
if you don't have a javascript conversion routine,
you do not have something that can be bundled
into an .html file, which is something you _need_.
and if you haven't ported your javascript converter,
to some other common language, you do not know
that it is robust enough for usage in the real world.
***
in this age of full-on markdown editing environments,
many open-source, a dingus is miserably insufficient.
> dillinger -- https://github.com/joemccann/dillinger
> stackedit -- https://github.com/benweet/stackedit
> gfmarkdown -- http://jbt.github.io/markdown-editor
> minimalist --
http://github.com/pioul/Minimalist-Online-Markdown-Editor
want more? see> http://mashable.com/2013/06/24/markdown-tools/
that list is a year old, but is still a fairly good inventory.
***
you also need an online converter with a friendly a.p.i.
this will create the canonical output for your converter.
***
nothing named "markdown" will avoid the tar-pit of
all the other flavors/editions also named "markdown".
anything _not_ named "markdown" will have difficulty
competing with the vague thing known as "markdown",
even if it is clearly equal or superior to all of the flavors.
because the blind men never did figure out the elephant.
this is a very fine mess which gruber has gotten us into.
thank goodness philly now brings to mind mo'ne davis.
***
anyone who says they support "markdown", _without_
specifying the exact converter they use, should be shot.
***
john macfarlane is one of the heroes of light-markup.
***
it will be fun to hear what fletcher has to say these days.
***
it will be fun to hear what gruber has to say these days.
-bowerbird