Re: header syntax.

On Nov 23, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 23 November 2012 14:50, Ryan Freebern <rfreebern@unionstmedia.com> wrote:
> 
>> I mean that a casual markdown user shouldn't find that a majority of their
>> documents are invalidated by a parser that implements our spec.
> 
> 
> Bit like asking for full forwards compatibility?

I'm just asking that we be conservative in our initial changes, and find a path forward that will maximize support for and adoption of our spec.

>> as our header syntax, we should add the variant with arbitrary trailing hash
>> marks and the setext variant to potential profile documents immediately.
>> Then, if usage surveys show them to be uncommon, those profiles can be
>> dropped.
> 
> Yes.... with one caveat.
> That the core profile not mention them in order that it be fully standalone?

Agreed.

>> Perhaps these documents can be part of the wiki for now and codified later.
> 
> If you wish to start such a document on the wiki please do, I find the above
> description quite clear.

I'll do that this weekend. (I'm remote right now.)

> (Guessing) would you say you are aiming at an intermediate profile
> (good across the pareto implementations)
> or app-specific, good for only a few implementations?

For issues like this, that are potentially widespread but dropped from the core, an intermediate profile.

Ryan

Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 15:29:01 UTC