You must log in or register to comment.
I hated markdown as recently as 2016 due to most of the editors used dual panes which just broke my brain. It wasn’t until I learned about mark text and Typora that I started loving markdown. Both render the text automatically. Now when I receive an .md file, it renders as soon as I open it :)
Now, I can’t live without markdown.
Sometimes I just want a lightweight markdown viewer. Something less than an IDE, but has a bit more formatting support than a text editor.
One of the original ideas behind Markdown was that a document should remain readable even before a computer interprets its formatting.
The author states this towards the beginning of the article. This is possible everywhere you can easily open a txt file. Note, there are quite a few platforms that don’t like to make it easily possible to open text files.
Then later, he goes on to say that opening it should interpret the formatting as well. This is neither the original premise of Markdown, nor is it easily doable. Namely, there are a number of different markdown ‘specs’: Github-flavored, Commonmark, etc. On top of that, Markdown is (mostly) a superset of html syntax. Technically any html is valid markdown formatting.
Thus, in order to ‘simply’ render the formatting of Markdown, you first need information on what type of markdown, and then also be running a fairly complex parsing+rendering pipeline.
Not to mention that you are doing all that for a document format that the non-tech/average user has never even heard of probably. This is the same reason why syntax highlighting (beyond Regex/Treesitter) isn’t part of most text editors.
Not to mention that you are doing all that for a document format that the non-tech/average user has never even heard of probably.
Just wanted to point out that literally everyone already uses it, in these very comments no less. On discord, in game chats that don’t support it, in regular text files. Literally, everywhere on the web, grandmas are using Markdown.
I know this is hard to hear, but…
Making Markdown files easier to use for the normal person is not a bad thing.
It is easy enough to use that grandmas are already using Markdown. Is that not already a sufficient level of ease of use for normal people? Normal people seem to have adapted to it just fine. I’d argue that’s because it’s just a simple text file, not in spite of it. Who are we trying to make it even easier for, literal zombies?
not in spite of it
I agree.
Everyone can write in Markdown already, I’ve seen people physically write asterisks for emphasis on paper (edit: I’m not saying markdown came first…). But not everyone can see it rendered.
This is mostly addressing the latter, so that we don’t all have to just imagine what the formatting looks like, and so that it can be used in settings where currently it would fit perfectly well, but it isn’t acceptable because it isn’t rendered.
I’m perfectly comfortable reading a raw Markdown file. That doesn’t really fly in a business setting. or in most places where people want formatting. There’s a reason people don’t just write [bold] in the middle of their resume/report/paper and expect the reader to visualize it with their mind’s eye.
The problem is that everybody knows Markdown, not everyone knows that it is Markdown or that Markdown files exist. And even if they do, they still can’t use it because support isn’t as ubiquitous as the formatting syntax. Making MD files more accessible would mean that people can use the knowledge they already have and learn more and be able to use it places where they want to.
Currently, people who could otherwise just use markdown are forced to use proprietary formats that are supported by their organizations or that they can expect the recipient open, like a a docx or PDF
I’m not sure why you’re criticizing the article by mentioning nuances as if they didn’t also mention them in the article…
The point is that when they average person double clicks an MD file, it should probably open and display.
They’re also like a bazillion different PDF and TXT formats, but viewers for them are rather ubiquitous.
You might say that nobody uses PDF viewers because they just opened them in a browser. Well, that’s also a suitable approach for MD.
The support doesn’t have to be comprehensive. I don’t think they’re asking for the God of all viewers and editors that supports every different styling and switches between them automatically.
The idea is that if you send someone a markdown file, they should be able to read it without having to go into a menu and opening with a text editor. You know, like Normies do with a bunch of far more complex standards already…
My guess is that this is because Markdown is mainly used by technical folk, and they’re fucking stupid when it comes to end-user experience and just haven’t considered it much. And the other reason is that the big players would rather push their proprietary formats so they don’t want to see adoption of Markdown.
The author is right. Widespread, ubiquitous support is far overdue for such a simple format. Your remarks about cellphones not opening text files isn’t a great argument against not opening markdown files; frankly, I think it’s absurd that they don’t, and that should be pointed out rather than used as an example of why we shouldn’t bother for MD. If an OS shipped on a floppy drive could have a text editor out of the box, I’m pretty sure your fancy multi-gigabyte smartphone in $current_year could do it too.
I swear, these comments are depressingly stupid. Imagine arguing about this for any other format…
Yes, markdown should be more accessible and its files should be easier to use. Why? Because everybody uses it already, even if they don’t know what it is. That’s how ubiquitous it is, and supporting it out of the box is what you’re arguing against. It’s hard to comprehend. Are you employed by Microsoft?
At some point my sister had to write a letter of motivation for a job application - a headline and some text, that’s all - and she mentioned to me in passing how much money she would have to pay for a Microsoft Word license in order to produce this document.
Obviously I showed her a free alternative, but the fact remain that normal people have absolutely no idea how to use computers. Just being able to open a Markdown file and see the same level of formatting as what we casually drop in this comment section would be groundbreaking for them. Being able to edit it could potentially save them heaps of money.
I suspect this explains why Markdown doesn’t work intuitively on most operative systems. There’s no money to be made from this degree of user control. Monetizing Markdown is hard as fuck.
Yeah, it just confuses me why people here are arguing against the idea that markdown should be more accessible to the normal user. I read this the moment I woke up and it’s been driving me a little mad. The formatting is literally one of the most ubiquitous things you can come across on the internet.
I understand that maybe this is something Microsoft et al would not rather pursue because they have their own proprietary formats they want to push instead… But why was every Lemmy comment here attacking the article? Do we not like free and open source standards any more? Do we not want these things to succeed?
Like, if you just want to say the author is a dumbass, then sure, but I don’t understand why people are so aggressive against the idea of making Markdown easier to use…
I guess they like markdown precisely because you can open it in Notepad on a Windows 98 or whatever, read and edit to your hearts desire, and then save it and be on your way. Maybe they find that presenting it as something a little more user friendly runs the risk of at some point running into conflict with that level of portability.
It’s hard to understand the things people around here feel strongly about. I would certainly enjoy being able to send a markdown file to my colleagues instead of having to convert whatever note I’m taking into docx so that they can understand what a headline is. Even odt is not a real option as they’ll introduce track changes or whatever in word and I won’t be able to see the same document they sent me.
Your first paragraph makes a very good point. I could understand that as an impulsive motivation. Thanks.
Yes, I also don’t want Markdown turning into a binary format. Absolutely. In fairness, I can see the risk of that in some situations. e.g. my professional obsidian vaults are so heavy on JS and custom plugins that the render is significantly detached from the source text, using dynamic elements. I guess I could see an unfortunate world where people push into that. But I only really see that as if it is a complete replacement for other document formats, which I don’t think it is. It’s sort of like text++ rather than odt–
I don’t see markdown replacing advanced formats in all cases like that, but I think it’s sufficient, even in its most basic forms, for the vast majority of people.
The point is that when they average person double clicks an MD file, it should probably open and display.
It does? I mean, I guess it depends on your OS and if there’s an handler for .md files. My machine opens them fine. I don’t know what the default is on windows. Handling a file extension with a smart default is really on the OS provider, though.
good points!
to add:
There will always be extensions that particular applications support and others do not. Some writers use footnotes, mathematical notation, diagrams, embedded HTML or specialized publishing syntax that goes beyond CommonMark and GitHub Flavored Markdown. I do not expect every built-in document viewer to reproduce every possible extension exactly.
the author initially wants full hardware support of markdown, but then backpedals to only the specs, i assume, he likes.
Holy fuck you guys are stupid…
“Full hardware support” for a text format? The standards he likes? They said they wanted cross-platform support and named the biggest and most ubiquitous standards there are. You know, the ones you used to type your comment.
What the fuck are you on about? Where’s this agro coming from?
“I think people should be able to use markdown easier” >screaming nerd rage ensues
good points!
agro
screaming nerd rage
nawww
Oh yeah, I’m not gonna lie, I’m totally crashing out in the comments.
To be clear, my point isn’t so much that people are aggressive, but rather that they’re hostile to the message of the article, which is as far as I can tell objectively a good thing that everyone should desire: more success for markdown, easier to use for more people.
How this is drawing such near-universal criticism (at the time of writing) is utterly dumbfounding to me.
This is such a long way to propose a terrible idea.
Markdown is text.
the end
I love when morons think they solve a problem nobody else has
They’re not solving anything, though. They’re pointing at a problem and saying it should be solved. That’s pretty different. Why the hell am I defending this so hard? Why the hell is everyone here attacking it so hard? I am so confused. It is not a bad thing to mark down to succeed or have more support. You all confuse me very much. Is this a tankie community? It’s really hard to follow the complete lack of logic.
You’re actually pretty close to what the top comment says. Phrasing matters I guess.
The universe needs balance
