Textile vs Markdown

michaelkpate · 2016-09-15 16:15:04

philwareham wrote #301538:

Which leads me to a subject that is up for debate: We need Markdown to ship as a core part of Textpattern NOT a plugin. I’m happy for Textile to stay as the default setting (which you can change at install time or afterwards in preferences to Markdown if you wish). New dev users will expect that, as will more and more end users who have grown up with Markdown.

+1 – easy for me because I won’t be doing any of the hard part

hcgtv · 2016-09-15 16:46:40

“But Dean Allen began to fade away. He wasn’t an infocide, but for several years it was as if he were on infohospice.” – Resurrecting Mark Pilgrim and Why the Lucky Stiff

Always good reads from you Michael, thanks.

So it was the f*cking Apple Fanboys that we have to thank for Markdown ;)

hcgtv · 2016-09-15 17:09:54

philwareham wrote #301543:

History here, and related. I’d stress this is Jekyll stuff – there is no indication GitHub will drop Textile support for its main site.

Fuck Ben, and since he’s a lawyer, he can come sue my ass if he doesn’t like what I say or what I’m about to say, here or everywhere.

That’s no reason to remove a mature markup language, it’s all politics, plain and simple.

Looking at this from another perspective, GitHub is a great collaboration tool, way better than Google Code, now that doesn’t mean we have to go, what did Dean say Buggerballs, into it.

michaelkpate · 2016-09-15 18:00:17

hcgtv wrote #301546:

Looking at this from another perspective, GitHub is a great collaboration tool, way better than Google Code, now that doesn’t mean we have to go, what did Dean say Buggerballs, into it.

Phil explained this above but I didn’t understand it at first either the last time this came up. The issue is not with Github – that supports Textile. The issue is not with Jekyll – that supports Textile. The issue is that Github Pages no longer supports Textile.

You can use Markdown instead of HTML. Markdown is simpler to read and write. – About GitHub Pages and Jekyll

There are clear advantages to maintaining the Documentation in a Git Repository at Github. Unfortunately for us, it doesn’t include Textile support but the thing you have to keep in mind: What is the best choice for the people using the Docs?

hcgtv · 2016-09-15 18:08:51

jakob wrote #301535:

There’s gitlab too. It’s github-like, offers unlimited private repos and also supports textile.

Check this out, GitLab is going to create an online IDE. This is getting interesting by the minute.

Time to give GitLab a try then, at least I can see the IDE in action and glean some knowledge from it. From what I’ve been reading, anything GitLab creates will be Open Source, so their interface will be in a repository for all to see. Go GitLab! Boo GitHub, not a friend to Open Source projects :(

hcgtv · 2016-09-15 20:52:24

michaelkpate wrote #301547:

What is the best choice for the people using the Docs?

For them to be accessible from the Site administration area.

There’s also the question, what’s the best choice for the people maintaining the docs?

Let me give you a real world example. On this forum there are so many tidbits of information that we’ve come across, that if we had an easy interface to copy/paste the example and the verbiage, and attach it to a template tag, wow that would of been cool.

The skinny of it, is that we are a CMS project, the “C” stands for content.

hcgtv · 2016-09-16 16:37:52

My submission to the Google crawler.

My content, markup by Textile.

gaekwad · 2016-09-16 16:45:31

philwareham wrote #301538:

Which leads me to a subject that is up for debate: We need Markdown to ship as a core part of Textpattern NOT a plugin. I’m happy for Textile to stay as the default setting (which you can change at install time or afterwards in preferences to Markdown if you wish).

Seven seventy, come on down.

hcgtv · 2016-09-17 10:16:54

gaekwad wrote #301570:

Seven seventy, come on down.

You was definitely in the right. That geezer was cruising for a bruising!

Destry · 2016-09-17 10:36:21

Bloke is going to code a new markup language, Textup [T↑], the best of both Textile and Markdown, neither of which is perfect in their own right. Textup will take over the universe with its intuitiveness and application. I will gladly write docs for it, using Textup, and learn it as a third markup formatting language in the process. I am already ambidextrous with Textile and Markdown (with a few advanced-use exceptions I need the cheet-sheet for), but I’ll be tri-ambi-destry-ously powerful when Textup courses through my veins.

—-

Oh, I overlooked that mention. :(

Last edited by Destry (2016-09-17 10:39:59)

hcgtv · 2016-09-17 12:26:43

Textile vs Markdown, the duel . . .

maverick · 2016-09-17 22:40:48

michaelkpate wrote #301547:

You can use Markdown instead of HTML. Markdown is simpler to read and write. – About GitHub Pages and Jekyll

The Textile vs Markdown discussion ahve been intense at times. I’ve never weighed in because I’m on another page entirely. Over the years I’ve come to the conclusion that I may be the only person who doesn’t get the Textile/Markdown wars.

NOT because I don’t see the difference between the two. I find Markdown frustrating with its multiple versions and far less elegant than Textile. I’ll chose Textile over Markdown any day.

Rather, I have always been a bit puzzled by the desire to create one more layer of language and framework in the name of simplicity. So people lobby for a graphical interface because Textile or Markdown are too complex, and people lobbied for Textile and Markdown because html is too complex, and html originally the solution for simple text mark up . . .

Thus we end up with the need for code to interpret html, and then more code to interpret the LML, then more code to translate the graphical interface.

For me, I don’t find html complex. So I don’t find Textile that much more simple. Granted, on some things it’s a bit faster. For a hyperlink as example. But if I didn’t have Textile, I don’t mind dropping back to html at all. In that I only need to know/remember a single mark up language, I actually prefer just html.

In my view, mark up languages are markup languages. If the end user can handle one, they can hand any of them, including the original – html. If they find html too complex, then a light weight markup language isn’t the answer; a WYSIWYG GUI is the only real viable alternative.

But as I said, I’ve come to the conclusion I’m likely the only person of such an opinion. Then again I’m such a Luddite, I still find xml cleaner than json, and prefer my html5 written with xhtml in mind (I like the clear open/close tags). I even prefer my websites as free of JavaScript as possible.

So all that said, Phil, I’m glad you are moving the pophelp to straight html.

And Bert – I do prefer Textile over Markdown, and unless we are going to drop Textile all together, I think Textpattern should give preference to it whenever possible, but that we also need to make room for Markdown, because apparently using two “*” is so much simpler for people than using <b></b> or the xhtml version, <strong></strong>

hcgtv · 2016-09-18 01:13:21

maverick wrote #301597:

And Bert – I do prefer Textile over Markdown, and unless we are going to drop Textile all together, I think Textpattern should give preference to it whenever possible

You can be my wing man any day :)

Seriously though, this project brought Textile into the world, it’s for better or worse, our baby. Textile, template tags, forms, pages, it was all there from the beginning, they go together.

I’m not adverse to bringing Markdown support to Textpattern, we’se civilized around here. I do agree that Textile should get preferential treatment, even have a built in Textile playground in some tab. For new users, I’d opt for a lightweight toolbar, until they wrapped their heads around markup.

maverick · 2016-09-18 04:56:44

hcgtv wrote #301599:

For new users, I’d opt for a lightweight toolbar, until they wrapped their heads around markup.

I hear ya.. Jukka’s rah_textile_bar is part of my default install for other people.

candyman · 2016-09-20 08:30:15

I understand that if the world is speaking a language (Markdown) we can’t continue to use our dialect (Textile) but, on the other side, Textpattern is too connected to Textile to allow just the thinking to put it on the same level.

So, are there any chances to see TextUp inside the 4.7 release?

Last edited by candyman (2016-09-20 08:30:34)

Textpattern CMS support forum

#16 2016-09-15 16:15:04

Re: Textile vs Markdown

philwareham wrote #301538:

#17 2016-09-15 16:46:40

Re: Textile vs Markdown

#18 2016-09-15 17:09:54

Re: Textile vs Markdown

philwareham wrote #301543:

#19 2016-09-15 18:00:17

Re: Textile vs Markdown

hcgtv wrote #301546:

#20 2016-09-15 18:08:51

Re: Textile vs Markdown

jakob wrote #301535:

#21 2016-09-15 20:52:24

Re: Textile vs Markdown

michaelkpate wrote #301547:

#22 2016-09-16 16:37:52

Re: Textile vs Markdown

#23 2016-09-16 16:45:31

Re: Textile vs Markdown

philwareham wrote #301538:

#24 2016-09-17 10:16:54

Re: Textile vs Markdown

gaekwad wrote #301570:

#25 2016-09-17 10:36:21

Re: Textile vs Markdown

#26 2016-09-17 12:26:43

Re: Textile vs Markdown

#27 2016-09-17 22:40:48

Re: Textile vs Markdown

michaelkpate wrote #301547:

#28 2016-09-18 01:13:21

Re: Textile vs Markdown

maverick wrote #301597:

#29 2016-09-18 04:56:44

Re: Textile vs Markdown

hcgtv wrote #301599:

#30 2016-09-20 08:30:15

Re: Textile vs Markdown

Board footer