On 7/11/2014 3:04 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
Le 11-juil.-2014 à 4:54, Sean Leonard <[email protected]> a écrit :
Since we cannot reach consensus on what ought to be "Standard Markdown" today, can the
community reach consensus on "Historical Markdown"--of which I propose three working
definitions?
* Classic Markdown: The Markdown syntax or Markdown.pl implementation, as
implemented by John Gruber, in 1.0.1, with all ambiguities, bugs, frustrations,
and contradictions. [In cases that the syntax and the tool contradict, we come
up with a way to resolve the contradictions.]
* Original Markdown: The Markdown syntax or Markdown.pl implementation, as implemented by
John Gruber, in 1.0.2b7, with as many of the ambiguities, bugs, frustrations, and
contradictions fixed as he actually fixed (or failed to fix) them. Aka "Markdown Web
Dingus".
* Idealized Markdown (aka Historical Standard Markdown): The Markdown that everyone can
agree is the way Markdown "should have been" back when there was One True
Markdown. Basically this is Original Markdown with its faults duly recognized and
corrected...many of these faults having been corrected in practice in divergent
implementations (Markdown Extra etc.) but never officially recognized in Original
Markdown.
I cannot say which of these three is better...but by recognizing these three as
common points, we can then start to compare on the same page.
You might also call the first two "Markdown 1.0.1" and "Markdown 1.0.2b7" for simplicity's sake. As
for the idealized version, that's what I call "Markdown" personally, or "plain Markdown" when I
need to disambiguate.
Ok; however, I understand that there are some differences between the
syntax <http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax> and the
1.0.1 implementation. Maybe also the 1.0.2b[x] implementation(s). Right?
-Sean
_______________________________________________
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
