Re: What's in this project for implementers?

On 27 November 2012 19:20, Ryan Freebern <rfreebern@unionstmedia.com> wrote:
> Below is my first draft of a message to implementers. Please let me know if
> I'm missing any vital information or being unclear about anything.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan
>
> -- message follows --
>
> Greetings,
> I don't need to tell you what a great tool Markdown is. As a simple and
> intuitive syntax that looks good as plain text and can be converted to
> sensible, attractive output in other formats, it's an amazing
> low-barrier-to-entry way to help people create attractive documents. It has
> very shallow learning curve and, once you're familiar with the basics,
> mostly just stays out of your way and lets you get things done.

>From which my take away is 'good stuff'

>
> However, it's undeniable that it has its problems. Some of its rules,
> especially when dealing with edge cases, aren't totally clear. Maybe it has
> too many options; maybe it doesn't have enough. In any case, it's a fact
> that while the basic syntax is pretty good, there are some rough edges that
> need to be ironed out. That's why there are so many different markdown
> flavors in the wild, and so many extensions to John Gruber's original
> syntax. While this does mean that by choosing the appropriate implementation
> you can get exactly the functionality you're looking for, it also means that
> learning how to use that implementation is more difficult, and once you
> start using it you may not be able to move your documents to another without
> a lot of clean-up work.

>From which my take away is 'but it has problems'
(what's the implied take away? Criticism of current implementations?)


>
> I'm writing to you on behalf of the recently-formed W3C Markdown Community
> Group (http://www.w3.org/community/markdown/) because you've been identified
> as the lead of a software project that consumes markdown syntax, and we
> recognize that you undoubtedly have a lot of valuable insight about
> markdown.
>
> Our goal, briefly, is to specify an unambiguous markdown syntax in order to
> allow easier implementation testing, simplify the learning process in order
> to expand markdown's usage, and increase portability of documents between
> implementations. To accomplish this, we want to make sure we're taking into
> account as many different thoughts, ideas, and concerns as possible. As an
> implementer, we particularly value your insight into the problems you've
> encountered and feedback you've received over the course of building your
> implementation, and we want to know how you think a markdown specification
> would benefit you, your users, and the web community as a whole.

Very clear.


>
> If you'd like to help out, please consider joining the group by creating a
> w3.org account and signing up at http://www.w3.org/community/markdown/join/.
> Alternatively, if you'd prefer to just provide one-time feedback, just send
> me your thoughts and I'll pass them on to the group. Again, we want to make
> sure we're working towards a beneficial solution to actual problems you've
> encountered, so anything you can provide to guide us in that direction is
> very welcome.

I think some will react negatively to creating a W3C account Ryan.
I like the alternative (though they may not be polite!)

My general reaction.
1. It's too early? We have nothing to tempt them, nothing to offer them.
2. If they wanted to they could have joined this group as we did.
AFAICT none have.

How about waiting until we have core done and can include that, with rationale?
It offers proof that we are serious. It shows that we intend to align
with common
MD features etc.

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 07:57:36 UTC