Allow text/markdown in 7.1 #607
Conversation
Fixes FamilySearch#222 Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <[email protected]>
dthaler
requested review from
clarkegj,
tychonievich,
albertemmerich,
lynchrs3 and
gibsongk
as code owners
|
|
||
| If needed, `text/html` can be converted to `text/plain` using the following steps: | ||
| - `**`, `*`, `__`, and `~~` for bold, italic, underlined, and strike-through text. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
~~ is not part of the original Markdown definition nor of commonmark; while useful, it is an extension and perhaps does not belong in this spec
|
|
||
| </div> | ||
|
|
||
| Supporting more of [Markdown](https://commonmark.org) is encouraged. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Discussed in steering committee 18 MAR 2025
The listed subset of commonmark is small, relative to the spec as a whole (omitting at least block quotes, inline code, code blocks, hard breaks, H3 through H6, underlined header syntax, inline HTML, horizontal rules, images, links, escaping characters), and lacks the clarifications about syntactic ambiguities that commonmark has (though some of those are introduced by things we omit).
- Should we encourage supporting all of CommonMark or just the provided subset?
- Should we keep the subset but reference CommonMark for syntactic ambiguity?
- Should we remove the subset and simply reference CommonMark?
- Should we say anything about supporting CommonMark extensions (like strike-through or definition lists)?
|
Part of the reason I included "strike out" in the list of supported (potential) markdown was to emulate what was specified in the HTML text. I was hoping to match the HTML spec but that got side tracked when I also need to include the other codes used by the software I use that include headings. I'm okay with indicating the the base support starts with CommonMark (probably should be spelled out), but it can be extended to support other markdown. The spec has already indicated that HTML can use other MarkupLanguage as needed so the Markdown needs similar wording!
Yes
Yes, the spec indicates the "encouragement" for other tags for HTML |
Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <[email protected]>
Fixes #222