Markdown grew to become a core a part of how I wrote. The simplicity and suppleness meant I’d dwell the dream of write as soon as, run wherever. It did result in some ambiguity, although. Gruber would in all probability say that is by design. His emphasis all through the Markdown documentation is on the syntax of Markdown, not—say—the ensuing HTML. His Perl script doesn’t help HTML class names or IDs, for instance, so you’ll be able to’t add these to the generated HTML. By the logic of the unique Markdown script, in order for you full management over the HTML output, then you definately’d want to write down in HTML.
This case is nice for Markdown customers: that’s, writers. It’s much less nice for programmers. In truth, it drives them loopy. Programmers don’t like ambiguity. It goes towards a lot of what programming is about. As a author utilizing Markdown, I like that I can decide whichever explicit model is greatest suited to my wants. As a programmer, I hate that after I construct one thing I’ve to make this similar resolution, which then impacts all of the individuals who use my completed product. Possibly I didn’t help some particular extension they have been anticipating as a result of they’ve at all times used the identical Markdown parser and assume that function is on the market.
If this weren’t unhealthy sufficient, there are additionally some ambiguities within the syntax. For instance, asterisks are used for italics when singular (*like this*) and daring when doubled (**like this**). To date so good. However what ought to occur for those who write **like* this**? Ought to that be rendered like* this? Or perhaps like this*? There’s no method to know; whoever is writing the parser has to make that call.
What’s extra, not like most extraordinarily profitable items of code, Markdown isn’t publicly hosted on the code-sharing web site du jour. It doesn’t have lots of of individuals contributing to it, and the final time the unique Perl script was up to date was 2004. This too rubs programmers the improper method. We’re a cliquish bunch; issues outdoors the clique are considered with suspicion.
A few decade in the past, there was an effort to get rid of the ambiguities in Markdown and produce it into line with coding dogma. Some programmers obtained collectively and created CommonMark, which makes the alternatives the unique Markdown script doesn’t and got here up with what its creators assume is the One Proper Solution to Do It.
CommonMark supplied consolation. It’s on Github. It has a dialogue discussion board. It appears to be an lively venture. I’ve by no means personally included CommonMark right into a venture, however its parsers are what convert your Markdown to HTML on such common websites as Stack Overflow, Github, and Reddit. (To get rid of the asterisk ambiguity, for instance, it proposed underscore for italics, asterisk for daring.) Presumably the builders behind CommonMark take into account it successful.
However it’s not Markdown. Not in title, and I’d argue not in spirit.
Across the time the CommonMark effort was occurring, the software program developer Dave Winer informed me one thing I nonetheless take into consideration: Markdown belongs to everybody who makes use of it. That is actually true due to the license. However it additionally jogged my memory of the true level of free software program. All of us have a say in it: by utilizing it, by adapting it, even by forking it.
Whether or not Gruber meant it this manner or not, Markdown does belong to everybody, and there’s no normal. I take advantage of a really previous model of Markdown for Python. Gruber presumably nonetheless makes use of his Perl script. Different individuals use different variations. It’s messy. It’s ambiguous. It’s human.
And this, ultimately, is the Means.