Re: Markdown Content-Type

Gosh, if only we still had extensibility and namespaces.

Seriously, this is not a bad idea as an extension.  An 'HTML5 extension'
specification that adds an element that is styled as a preformatted block
by default, but if your user agents does know how to parse its contents
could be rendered.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Michael C <m@michaelcullum.com> wrote:

> I'd say that it would be nice to get MD parsed directly by browsers. It
> opens up the web to new possibilities of which pages can be very basic. MD
> is essentially a watered down, very basic version of HTML. Why not
> emphasise this; it makes basic web development easier for novice users (but
> doesn't put us all out of a job)? For example, many doc writers write docs
> in MD. It would be nice if these could be directly parsed, instead of
> having to be converted to be put on the web. Either as pages in either own
> right all MD or as a tag in html (i.e. `<md>`) I think it would be nice to
> let browsers handle the parsing; it also makes it more likely standards
> will be kept as there are less (main stream) browsers than there would be
> convertors.
>
> Karl, what are your thoughts on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Cullum
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Pawson [mailto:dave.pawson@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 20 November 2012 08:26
> > To: Markdown List
> > Subject: Re: Markdown Content-Type
> >
> > On 20 November 2012 08:02, Michael C <m@michaelcullum.com> wrote:
> > > I'd say getting a content type would be a good idea if we want to get
> wider
> > adoption including direct parsing by browsers and email clients (which
> would
> > be nice but won't happen for a while).
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Michael Cullum
> >
> > I agree about wider adoption, but do we want direct browser parsing?
> > Not sure how or who it would help?
> > Is there a use case Michael?
> >
> > regards
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Dave Pawson [mailto:dave.pawson@gmail.com]
> > >> Sent: 20 November 2012 07:57
> > >> To: Markdown List
> > >> Subject: Re: Markdown Content-Type
> > >>
> > >> On 19 November 2012 21:51, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com> wrote:
> > >> > I have no knowledge of any markdown content-type?
> > >> >
> > >> > * Should there be one?
> > >> > * What should it be if yes?
> > >> > * Is there anything expected from a user agent (mua, browser, etc)
> > >> > when
> > >> meeting this content-type?
> > >> >
> > >> > I can see for example a story where when a user agent meets
> > >> >
> > >> > Content-Type: text/$TOBEDEFINED
> > >> >
> > >> > It renders it at simple plain text when it doesn't know how to
> > >> > render
> > >> markdown, and interpret it when it knows. One (furture) benefit could
> > >> be Mail User Agent with knowledge of markdown.
> > >>
> > >> 1. Can we justify requesting a content type?
> > >> 2. Would rendering as plain text be so bad?
> > >>
> > >> Personally I would judge this out of scope.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> regards
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Dave Pawson
> > >> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> > >> Docbook FAQ.
> > >> http://www.dpawson.co.uk
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dave Pawson
> > XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> > Docbook FAQ.
> > http://www.dpawson.co.uk
>
>
>


-- 
Shane P. McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.