Markdown Discuss - Nov 2014 - Markdown-Discuss Digest, Vol 139, Issue 3

> As a mere user, I've noticed the same thing. One of the purported 
> benefits of markdown is its portability, i.e., the ability of the user 
> to write in any editor, knowing that he can then load it into any number 
> of parsers and get consistent results.
> 
> But, with all the different flavors out there, one now has to think, 
> "which parser will I use to convert this file?" and insert
markdown
> accordingly. I recently discovered at least four different ways in which 
> parsers deal with typographic quotes and dashes, from the original 
> SmartyPants to the Python Markdown implementation of SmartyPants to the 
> Calibre implementation of it to RMarkdown's implementation (not to 
> mention ReStructuredText and Textile, both of which do it differently, 
> yet). So, I have to commit to a given dialect and converter before I 
> begin to type. To me, that's defeating one of the fundamental purposes 
> of markdown.
> 
> Virgil

I believe that is why a neutral, ?Bland? Markdown recommendation is needed. Not
as yet another parser or syntax but as something to tell writers and editors to
use, so that their content can be properly processed.

This is actually not too difficult. http://jeffmcneill.com/bland-markdown

--
Jeff McNeill

hi Jeff

thanks for sharing this, hadn't bumped into it yet :)

besides trying to define a set of specs for core, it's also a good run-down
of basic rules and practices.
it may help me be more consistent in how I write MD.

there's a typo in "quoted text"

a greater-than symbol <

and I don't agree with "tables as images", that makes very little
sense to me :D

cheers
ubi



On 11 Nov 2014, at 07:38, Jeff McNeill <jeff at jeffmcneill.com> wrote:
>> As a mere user, I've noticed the same thing. One of the purported 
>> benefits of markdown is its portability, i.e., the ability of the user 
>> to write in any editor, knowing that he can then load it into any
number
>> of parsers and get consistent results.
>> 
>> But, with all the different flavors out there, one now has to think, 
>> "which parser will I use to convert this file?" and insert
markdown
>> accordingly. I recently discovered at least four different ways in
which
>> parsers deal with typographic quotes and dashes, from the original 
>> SmartyPants to the Python Markdown implementation of SmartyPants to the
>> Calibre implementation of it to RMarkdown's implementation (not to 
>> mention ReStructuredText and Textile, both of which do it differently, 
>> yet). So, I have to commit to a given dialect and converter before I 
>> begin to type. To me, that's defeating one of the fundamental
purposes
>> of markdown.
>> 
>> Virgil
> 
> 
> I believe that is why a neutral, ?Bland? Markdown recommendation is needed.
Not as yet another parser or syntax but as something to tell writers and editors
to use, so that their content can be properly processed.
> 
> This is actually not too difficult. http://jeffmcneill.com/bland-markdown
> 
> --
> Jeff McNeill 
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/markdown-discuss/attachments/20141111/275c0b48/attachment.html>