I've never seen someone look so happy to be building an outdoor shower. #ma #capecod
Correcting a missed marketing opportunity. #mavericks
Podcasts really are awesome. I bought a pro mic a while back ... maybe it's time?
Hooray for lunchtime company! #ma
So proud to have joined this march.
#restorethefourth #embarcadero #nsa #prism #civilrights #humanrights #march #protest #ferrybuilding
Our friend Chris's game. #Ma is showing me how to play.
Earlier today, I noted that I didn't get why people would use markdown to blog on their own sites.
That post was syndicated to the social networks I'm active on, and I got lots of very passionate replies across all of them. HTML is too heavy, and the existing rich text editors can't be trusted. #Markdown is easy to write, and its fidelity is easy to maintain when you send it: unlike a rich text editor, it isn't likely to break tags or be displayed wildly differently across systems. Finally, it's pretty close to the kind of hand-made markup you might add if you were writing a text file without knowing you were using a markup language.
Message received - and it was striking to realize how much people cared about it - but I respectfully have to disagree. All of those assumptions are based on the current state of software: you use markdown because you can't trust other editors to not break your stuff, and because most of the editors in use today have heavy, slow UIs that get in your way.
I think we can do better.
One pointer to the future, as Paul Squires pointed out to me, is Medium's editor, which is designed specifically to stay out of your way. I've written a few pieces on Medium, and have to agree: it's well-designed and just works. Of course, one of the reasons it just works is that it just runs on Medium. The portability use case isn't served here at all, either for transferring text content from place to place, or for using the editor on a bunch of different sites.
Nonetheless, I think there might be a future here, which is also pointed to by the likes of products like Aloha Editor. It seems reasonable that a configurable HTML editor could actually become part of the HTML spec. HTML5 does include the contentEditable attribute, which makes any content editable - but it unfortunately doesn't provide a way to submit that content as part of a form, meaning that these updates have to be sent via back-end JavaScript. It also doesn't provide style toolbars in the way that, for example, video tags can display player buttons using the controls attribute. It would be nice to see these things, so that users can begin to trust editors, and we don't have to use shims like Markdown when we don't need to.
In the future, hopefully we'll able to just write.
·
Posts
·
Share this post
Number one justification I'm hearing for using #markdown vs a smarter editor: portability. Effectively a lightweight transport format for rich text.
Whoa! A cacophony of "because I want to edit text". But then why not a smarter, context-sensitive rich text editor? #markdown
