6 ms·

Thanks. Really happy to see that you're open to a complete rewrite of the stmd spec (to a possible algorithm-based style). I'll be happy to open a post in talk

by roop 12y ago

Thanks. Really happy to see that you're open to a complete rewrite of the stmd spec (to a possible algorithm-based style). I'll be happy to open a post in talk.commonmark.org on the ambiguity problems caused by using a declarative style for the stmd spec. I'll do that once the forum is back (I can't seem to access it right now). In parallel, I too will try to work out what the syntax differences are between stmd and vfmd. Meanwhile, please see: http://www.vfmd.org/differences/ http://www.vfmd.org/differences/ (in case you haven't already).

encoder 12y ago
I (for one) can't wait to see what the two of you can do together. I highly respect the work you've both done around Markdown, and I think you could easily accomplish your goals (of a consistent and sensible Markdown parsing rule-set) as a team.
roop 12y ago
Here they are: Post on declarative style: http://talk.commonmark.org/t/571 http://talk.commonmark.org/t/571 Syntax diff: https://github.com/vfmd/vfmd-spec/wiki/commonmark-vs-vfmd https://github.com/vfmd/vfmd-spec/wiki/commonmark-vs-vfmd