What if... we had Markdown as a first-class citizen of Geminispace?


I'm feeling a bit conflicted about this, but ultimately it's up to you to decide which format suits your content the best.

@lutindiscret Yeah, using a well-defined spec as a reference is certainly the wisest approach.

Although I wouldn’t want to implement the full CommonMark spec in its entirety…

@jk well partial support is quite a pain for content creator.

If you can't write something without being anxious about it not being rendered correctly in some browser (and when you fix, it breaks in other browsers...).

You might be recreating what made the web a painful platform: spending more time to fix browser-compatibility issues than enjoying content creation. IMO, that would break what makes Gemini more enjoyable than the web for content creators 😔


Also @jk, if you choose this path, please at least, don't have a "quirck mode" and make Lagrange do not print anything but an error message if the document has syntax error.

Allow rendering of poorly structured content is what made the web full of broken pages. Fail early will force creators to make things properly. I don't want "this gemlog is best rendered with <insert-not-my-gemini-browser-here>" to be back from the deads.

@lutindiscret Is there a way to validate CommonMark so as to detect if anything is a syntax error? I've been under the impression that there's basically no such thing as syntax errors in Markdown; everything will yield some sort of output.

When it comes to formal structured languages like HTML, I agree it's important not to bend the rules, as the history of the web has demonstrated.

> no such thing as syntax errors in Markdown

@jk I think you have a point 🤔 I can't think of any.

Inscrivez-vous pour prendre part à la conversation
libre-entreprise Mastodon

Le réseau social de l'avenir : Pas d'annonces, pas de surveillance institutionnelle, conception éthique et décentralisation ! Possédez vos données avec Mastodon !