|
This is the git tree of my commit in Sourceforge before I removed the raw HTML according to vq's opinion. It renders it fine. The only issue was the file extension. I understand the reasons for dreading any markup, it's just a proposal anyway if it's too inconvenient
we can always drop the idea.
From: Lawrence Velázquez <larryv@xxxxxxx>
Sent: 19 May 2022 09:56 To: dana <dana@xxxxxxx> Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxx <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>; Bevan Stanely <bevanstanely@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Proposal: Use Markdown syntax for README and other documentation External Email
On Thu, May 19, 2022, at 12:02 AM, dana wrote: > On Wed 18 May 2022, at 20:10, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: >> While nice for editing, raw markup (even Markdown) makes for a poor >> reading experience. > > I don't think that's necessarily the case, as demonstrated by the fact > that Bevan thought we were already using Markdown lol. And we very nearly > are I agree that Markdown is not bad if limited to the quieter markup (e.g., headings, strong, emphasis, lists, blockquotes, etc.). Those also tend to be decently portable between implementations. The problem is that it's always tempting to move on to the less-quiet markup :-/ > I don't think it'd be a big change to have the README standardise on some > sub-set of Markdown to make it look a little nicer on code-hosting sites, > as long as we continued to avoid the more advanced/noisy features like > images and hyper-links The PR in question introduces both of those things, as well as raw HTML (which SourceForge would sanitize away) and backslash escaping. -- vq |