it’s a fake “standard.” They didn’t think of Markdown, invent it, or do anything to help it’s advance.
No one needs to “comply” with “CommonMark. The CommonMark project has been trying to take ownership of Markdown for years. It’s ridiculous and annoying.
They didn’t think of Markdown, invent it, or do anything to help it’s advance.
You say “it”, when one of the reasons CommonMark exists, is that there is no single “it”, there are divergent implementations/extensions. The original implementation is not a specification, and it ‘has bugs’/is ambiguous.
I am not too well-informed; who is better suited to “do anything to help it’s advance”? And what did CM do wrong?
I presume what leeflannery is referring to is that John Gruber is BDFL of Markdown and the only authority. Only he’s more like the Absent Dictator for Life, which resulted in a proliferation of implementations that sometimes conflicted with each other and Markdown and led Jeff Atwood (of StackOverflow) to establish CM.
it’s a fake “standard.” They didn’t think of Markdown, invent it, or do anything to help it’s advance.
Every standard is fake, if you want to be pedantic about it. No C compiler has to comply with the ANSI standard, no web server has to implement the HTTP spec. Nor are these standards set in stone (good ones at least), and they develop with trends, new needs and realization of previous shortcomings.
If it’s a good standard, people will adopt it when doing something related to markdown, otherwise they won’t. This doesn’t look like something “stupid”, if you were to ask me, but rather an incentive to create a well defined, common sensical, sane specification, to improve the current state of markdown – and if one doesn’t like it, there’s absolutely no need to worry about it or pay any attention whatsoever to the project.
The intended audience is people who need to choose a licence and have no idea what the relevant choices are.
There might be additional specific requirements, which make the choice harder or easier. For example, if you want to submit your code to the D standard library, you must use the Boost licence. For the wizard, I do not care for such specific constraints.
The goal is not to provide an overview over all licences.
Yeah it says it’s a wizard but I’m not seeing any way to answer the questions and return a suggestion. Maybe it doesn’t work on mobile Safari? Looks more like a short FAQ.
You have to press the line you find appropriate in the grey box… It’s not very obvious and I only found out because I accidentally clicked when I tried to scroll on my phone.
This makes my brain hurt, what conclusions are we supposed to take away even if we did believe in their methodology?
Oh R knocked C# out of the top five, not good news for .NET devs. HTML checks in at #16 we’d probably better not use it until it breaks the top ten. PHP is better than Javascript it says so right here.
This is the single biggest issue with rankings of that kind, be it TIOBE or otherwise. It simply doesn’t convey much information other than what everyone felt already. Okay, the last part is a bit of a stretch, but still. This only gets worse when people pull out this as an “objective” argument in a language debate.
Time to get my “The TIOBE index is not a credible source” shirt printed.
Wow - I HAVE this issue of Wired in a box somewhere, I remember reading this article as a kid. It has the creators of the game “Myst” on the cover if I’m not mistaken.
Can’t say for sure why this article always stuck with me but it sure has …
I just asked my kids. The 10 y/o knew it meant “save”, but didn’t know or care what it was. The 7 y/o also knew it meant “save” and he said he always thought it was a vending machine.
Personally, I don’t understand why we need a new save icon. The floppy drive has been tested with teenagers, and even they knew it meant save even though they didn’t know what it was.
The origin of the symbol is irrelevant to its current day meaning. But it’s also fun I imagine, to discover the origin at some point later in life: “Ohh, so that’s where this comes from!” Kind of like an easter egg.
I don’t understand why some people have such an aversion with “old” things. Just because the floppy disk itself is old and obsolete is a reason to keep the icon. Not throw it away because.. uhm.. why again?
Using “SJW” disqualifies you from having a constructive conversation. It’s dismissive, pejorative, and it’s a code-word for “bitch.” It signals that you’re only interested in addressing your echo chamber.
Yes, yes, let’s silence people out of hand and dismiss their viewpoints because of their choice of words.
SJW is a term that, for better or for worse, has certain connotations making it useful for friend and foe alike when addressing certain audiences. Feminist, for example, isn’t quite the same as SJW–consider the ongoing issues with intersectionality and its application in that community.
It’s a valid term, and treating it like some insult is not particularly helpful.
In my experience “feature flags” are always a nightmare. Is the flag on or off in staging? In prod? Were all features tested with the flag on? With the flag off? What if there are two flags? What if a dev doesn’t have knowledge of all the flags and what they do?
I agree. Unless you work in a playground/sandbox or new tech is your product.
Anecdotally, as an indie dev, I am looking at things like Rust to build tools. But at work, I’m using PHP and MySQL (OK, I admit: mariaDB) for web dev. Python for embedded hardware. My recovery strategy is focused on being able to install an OS and copy some files back. It’s hard to KISS with a moving target.
I’m somewhere in the middle on this article but I hear you.
But I think you’re onto something with Rust at home, PHP at work. For me it’s more C# at work, Go at home. I want to stay ahead - I just don’t want my client to have to pay for missteps.
That’s a pretty prevalent bonmot, but it has issues. It assumes people get fired over technology choices.
No one ever got fired for choosing Elasticsearch or MongoDB. That might be a bitter pill to swallow for most technologists. They get fired because the project failed to reach expectations. Careless choice of technology can be an issue here and is rather often also at the core of the issue. Obviously, if a project fails horribly, you will search for the easiest approach angle to relieve a person off their post, and careless tech choices can be one of them. And pretty often, a risky choice and inability to master is also one of the actual issues.
If the project succeeds, no one will question all that.
But when a project fails, some people will point to the unproven technology stack that was selected. Whether or not it was the cause of the failure or not.
At this point, you are on the defensive trying to validate your choices and shift blame. If you’d have picked safe, conservative bets over new frontiers, this choice would have been easier to justify.
This opens up the possibility for a dock scenario where a single cable to the monitor can charge a laptop and also mirror the laptop’s display onto the external monitor, and the external monitor would also be able to serve as a USB hub for a keyboard, mouse, headsets, flash drives, and other USB peripherals.
After coming back home, I only need to plug one cable to the Macbook for doing all of these: charge the laptop, connect to external display, connect to other accessories. In the long-run, I bet that this convenience would win over the reluctant need to buy an extra accessory.
But would it be that much better than any other laptop dock? I mean, it’s smaller, but I’d rather use the lenovo usb 3.0 dock than this thing where you’d have to daisy chain another usb dock to use a keyboard and a mouse.
It’s hard for me to regularly admit that I’m just not their audience, even though I drool over retina screens and thin laptops. The dichotomy of what I want and what is possible is frustrating.
I already only need to plug two cables into my MBP: power and Thunderbolt. Everything else (Ethernet, USB keyboard and mouse and headphones) plugs into the Thunderbolt display.
How is that supposed to work if you have both an MBP and one of these new ones as your ultraportable? Is there going to be a USB-C to Thunderbolt adapter that actually supports using a Thunderbolt hub like this? I’d be really surprised if that happens or is even technically feasible.
More likely, now you’ll need one monitor to hook up to your MBP, and a second monitor to hook up to your USB-C MacBook, and then whenever you want to switch you’ll have to unplug all your shit from the Thunderbolt display and plug it into a USB-C hub.
This USB-C MacBook makes more sense if you don’t have any existing Macs.
So, I have to pay at least 79,99 USD just to connect an external display and/or any single USB device?
And then I also have to buy an extra HDMI to DisplayPort adaptor/cable for all of my DisplayPort monitors without HDMI (which is, like, most of them), since Apple doesn’t even have any USB-C to mini-DisplayPort adaptors? WTF? Are they declaring mini-DisplayPort dead, after only a few years of finishing up the switch over to Thunderbolt?
Why are they only selling adapters to connect MacBook to a “TV or projector”? What about the plentiful DisplayPort monitors?
For connecting external displays, they now seem to be pushing wireless via AirPlay as the desired solution. I haven’t yet been in a conference room or classroom with a projector that supports that, though, so I carry around both VGA and HDMI dongles.
Ha, it’s interesting how experiences differ. I was more like “damn, apple got into that market fast”. AppleTVs everywhere, from startups to enterprise for me.
Interesting. I’ve never seen AppleTVs in a university classroom, in either Denmark or the US. Most of our classrooms in Denmark have projector systems that are about 5-7 years old, with VGA/DVI connectors. A few more recently refurbished ones have recently (2012-2014) added HDMI connectors. I think they’re currently waiting to see what will win out before doing further upgrades. There was a proposal to add HDMI everywhere, but they didn’t want to spend the money unless they were sure HDMI would be the connector of choice for the next 5 years or so. It might be that jumping straight to wireless is what happens.
Yeah; that might be a sticking point some places. I worked a place where it was an offence to plug anything into USB ports, and the security people were discussing plugging USB ports using a hot-glue gun. Possibly for the same reason, PS-2 mice and keyboards were preferred at this place.
shrug I guess I don’t see the issue with javascript? npm is increasingly just a package manager for javascript apps and modules..
You could surely use or write a different scaffolding engine. Or not use scaffolding at all. But the Yeoman scaffolding and generator-aspnet are there, easy to get, and they work.
I appreciate the conversation and that assumptions about Scrum are being challenged. And I agree that Scrum is not a silver bullet.
But I’ve seen planning poker work. It does not always go like the author’s anecdote. If some dev just barks “20 points? REALLY?” when the team is trying to come to an estimate, that dev is an asshole and you’ve got larger problems.
And I’ve seen morning standups work too. Someone has to be tasked with keeping the team on task. The conservation needs to be limited to what happened yesterday, what happens today, and what blockers can the PM tackle for the team.
I’ve seen this work in large organizations. I’m not talking about an 8 person start-up. Just because it’s not universally applicable or successful doesn’t mean it needs to die in a fire.
(Nice troll style points for the title and the image of “Visual Studio TFS” branded planning poker cards though.)
Agreed. I also think the article misses massively on the “Why are we supposed to think developers are not business people?” It’s more the case that developers are not necessarily subject matter experts on the business subjects. Your US-based developer is going to understand international finance issues better than the international accounting folks? Please tell me more of all the magical unicorns you’ve employed who hold better subject matter expertise than.. well… those who work in the subjects.
I’ve noticed that developers themselves are very prone to the misconception that being good at writing software makes them good at everything that their software deals with. particularly annoying is when they have some reductive argument that they are convinced is correct because everyone else is clearly just overcomplicating things.
Also, planning poker isn’t scrum in the same way that syrup isn’t pancakes. Some people use them together, sure. But it’s a pretty weak argument.
On the other hand, there’s something to be said about how common it is to do “scrum plus” or “scrum but.” (And, indeed, much has been written about this, and a fair bit more coherently as well.)
It’s both a criticism and a mundane fact that scrum doesn’t reliability fix every organizational misstep within a group and the groups with which it must interact. It’s not a very opinionated framework, and so it tends to attract opinions, both in favor of planning poker and the like, and against.
As Markdown’s creator Gruber has noted - “ambiguity is a feature.”
Sure, that’s a tongue-in-cheek observation. But I haven’t had any issue using Markdown for the last decade. I don’t agree with an arbitrary handful of devs/personalities defining the “standard.”
Are the millions of existing documents classified as “legacy Markdown” now?
HA that’s pretty good. I was trying to give OpenSSL a slight touch of respect with that adjective. Everyone’s flat-out trashing it so no need for me to pile on there.
I still think instead of disparaging OpenSSL post-mortem, our time would be better spent turning our eyes to the next one.
“CommonMark compliant” … lol yeah, forget it.
it’s a fake “standard.” They didn’t think of Markdown, invent it, or do anything to help it’s advance.
No one needs to “comply” with “CommonMark. The CommonMark project has been trying to take ownership of Markdown for years. It’s ridiculous and annoying.
You say “it”, when one of the reasons CommonMark exists, is that there is no single “it”, there are divergent implementations/extensions. The original implementation is not a specification, and it ‘has bugs’/is ambiguous.
I am not too well-informed; who is better suited to “do anything to help it’s advance”? And what did CM do wrong?
I presume what leeflannery is referring to is that John Gruber is BDFL of Markdown and the only authority. Only he’s more like the Absent Dictator for Life, which resulted in a proliferation of implementations that sometimes conflicted with each other and Markdown and led Jeff Atwood (of StackOverflow) to establish CM.
Atwood’s story is here - https://blog.codinghorror.com/standard-markdown-is-now-common-markdown/
And here’s the Github issue with some more detail - https://github.com/commonmark/CommonMark/issues/19
Every standard is fake, if you want to be pedantic about it. No C compiler has to comply with the ANSI standard, no web server has to implement the HTTP spec. Nor are these standards set in stone (good ones at least), and they develop with trends, new needs and realization of previous shortcomings.
What the CommonMark project want to achieve isn’t to make up some unrelated markup language, or to feel special for themselves, but “propose a standard, unambiguous syntax specification for Markdown, along with a suite of comprehensive tests to validate Markdown implementations”. And as I’ve already mention in this thread, these people aren’t nobodies, but instead it was initiated by some of the more major figures in the “markdown scene”. Sure, they don’t “own” markdown (whatever that is supposed to mean), but they are proposing a common ground to strongly define the syntax and the semantics of a markdown parser, having have already published revisions, updating their specification.
If it’s a good standard, people will adopt it when doing something related to markdown, otherwise they won’t. This doesn’t look like something “stupid”, if you were to ask me, but rather an incentive to create a well defined, common sensical, sane specification, to improve the current state of markdown – and if one doesn’t like it, there’s absolutely no need to worry about it or pay any attention whatsoever to the project.
Congrats and thank you. Well done!
The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/334176.The_Sparrow
… horrifying? Sorry, this is super rough.
The intended audience is people who need to choose a licence and have no idea what the relevant choices are.
There might be additional specific requirements, which make the choice harder or easier. For example, if you want to submit your code to the D standard library, you must use the Boost licence. For the wizard, I do not care for such specific constraints.
The goal is not to provide an overview over all licences.
Care to elaborate what horrifies you the most?
Yeah it says it’s a wizard but I’m not seeing any way to answer the questions and return a suggestion. Maybe it doesn’t work on mobile Safari? Looks more like a short FAQ.
You have to press the line you find appropriate in the grey box… It’s not very obvious and I only found out because I accidentally clicked when I tried to scroll on my phone.
I’m the author.
Good point. I should change the style so they look like buttons instead of bullet points.
Edit: Done. Should work on mobile now.
This makes my brain hurt, what conclusions are we supposed to take away even if we did believe in their methodology?
Oh R knocked C# out of the top five, not good news for .NET devs. HTML checks in at #16 we’d probably better not use it until it breaks the top ten. PHP is better than Javascript it says so right here.
This is the single biggest issue with rankings of that kind, be it TIOBE or otherwise. It simply doesn’t convey much information other than what everyone felt already. Okay, the last part is a bit of a stretch, but still. This only gets worse when people pull out this as an “objective” argument in a language debate.
Time to get my “The TIOBE index is not a credible source” shirt printed.
Wow - I HAVE this issue of Wired in a box somewhere, I remember reading this article as a kid. It has the creators of the game “Myst” on the cover if I’m not mistaken.
Can’t say for sure why this article always stuck with me but it sure has …
I just asked my kids. The 10 y/o knew it meant “save”, but didn’t know or care what it was. The 7 y/o also knew it meant “save” and he said he always thought it was a vending machine.
Personally, I don’t understand why we need a new save icon. The floppy drive has been tested with teenagers, and even they knew it meant save even though they didn’t know what it was.
Also none of the suggestions were any good. The “check” from the comments is the closest and still doesn’t truly imply “save.”
What problem are we trying to solve again?
We’re trying to find a physical representation of an abstract idea to avoid using written language.
I agree.
The origin of the symbol is irrelevant to its current day meaning. But it’s also fun I imagine, to discover the origin at some point later in life: “Ohh, so that’s where this comes from!” Kind of like an easter egg.
I don’t understand why some people have such an aversion with “old” things. Just because the floppy disk itself is old and obsolete is a reason to keep the icon. Not throw it away because.. uhm.. why again?
I don’t think the highest level of mastery for source control is “has tried Git.”
In fairness I think this thing is a few years old (2008?) at this point.
Ohhhh ok I didn’t notice that. That’s a little different.
Where does “has tried git, but doesn’t use it” land? :)
Using “SJW” disqualifies you from having a constructive conversation. It’s dismissive, pejorative, and it’s a code-word for “bitch.” It signals that you’re only interested in addressing your echo chamber.
Yes, yes, let’s silence people out of hand and dismiss their viewpoints because of their choice of words.
SJW is a term that, for better or for worse, has certain connotations making it useful for friend and foe alike when addressing certain audiences. Feminist, for example, isn’t quite the same as SJW–consider the ongoing issues with intersectionality and its application in that community.
It’s a valid term, and treating it like some insult is not particularly helpful.
In my experience “feature flags” are always a nightmare. Is the flag on or off in staging? In prod? Were all features tested with the flag on? With the flag off? What if there are two flags? What if a dev doesn’t have knowledge of all the flags and what they do?
Ordered this one to read with my 9 y/o: JavaScript for Kids: A Playful Introduction to Programming
I agree. Unless you work in a playground/sandbox or new tech is your product.
Anecdotally, as an indie dev, I am looking at things like Rust to build tools. But at work, I’m using PHP and MySQL (OK, I admit: mariaDB) for web dev. Python for embedded hardware. My recovery strategy is focused on being able to install an OS and copy some files back. It’s hard to KISS with a moving target.
I’m somewhere in the middle on this article but I hear you.
But I think you’re onto something with Rust at home, PHP at work. For me it’s more C# at work, Go at home. I want to stay ahead - I just don’t want my client to have to pay for missteps.
C++2003 at work (But used more like C with classes) and C++11/14/17 at home.
C++ for fun, that’s a bold move.
C++11 and C++14 are fun again
Python, C++ and JavaScript at work, Common Lisp at home.
(Aaand actually a tiny bit of Common Lisp at work I managed to sneak in.)
When I was a student, I made a comment about how they taught what I felt was old-hat technology instead of the cutting edge new toys.
The professor replied “no manager ever got fired for picking Java and MySQL for a project”.
That’s a pretty prevalent bonmot, but it has issues. It assumes people get fired over technology choices.
No one ever got fired for choosing Elasticsearch or MongoDB. That might be a bitter pill to swallow for most technologists. They get fired because the project failed to reach expectations. Careless choice of technology can be an issue here and is rather often also at the core of the issue. Obviously, if a project fails horribly, you will search for the easiest approach angle to relieve a person off their post, and careless tech choices can be one of them. And pretty often, a risky choice and inability to master is also one of the actual issues.
If the project succeeds, no one will question all that.
Yes, of course.
But when a project fails, some people will point to the unproven technology stack that was selected. Whether or not it was the cause of the failure or not.
At this point, you are on the defensive trying to validate your choices and shift blame. If you’d have picked safe, conservative bets over new frontiers, this choice would have been easier to justify.
Python for Embedded? That qualifies as hipster!
Haha! I know! I use a Windows Phone and App.net is my only social network! :-]
A single port?
Yes, but it is USB-C. According to http://www.anandtech.com/show/8518/hands-on-with-usb-type-c-reversible-usb-connectors
Also, Apple sells these accessories:
To which I’d need to chain another USB hub and a USB-ethernet adapter, unfortunately.
Jesus, they make port to distributable thing using external cable. Money, money, money.
But look it from a different perspective.
After coming back home, I only need to plug one cable to the Macbook for doing all of these: charge the laptop, connect to external display, connect to other accessories. In the long-run, I bet that this convenience would win over the reluctant need to buy an extra accessory.
But would it be that much better than any other laptop dock? I mean, it’s smaller, but I’d rather use the lenovo usb 3.0 dock than this thing where you’d have to daisy chain another usb dock to use a keyboard and a mouse.
It’s hard for me to regularly admit that I’m just not their audience, even though I drool over retina screens and thin laptops. The dichotomy of what I want and what is possible is frustrating.
I already only need to plug two cables into my MBP: power and Thunderbolt. Everything else (Ethernet, USB keyboard and mouse and headphones) plugs into the Thunderbolt display.
How is that supposed to work if you have both an MBP and one of these new ones as your ultraportable? Is there going to be a USB-C to Thunderbolt adapter that actually supports using a Thunderbolt hub like this? I’d be really surprised if that happens or is even technically feasible.
More likely, now you’ll need one monitor to hook up to your MBP, and a second monitor to hook up to your USB-C MacBook, and then whenever you want to switch you’ll have to unplug all your shit from the Thunderbolt display and plug it into a USB-C hub.
This USB-C MacBook makes more sense if you don’t have any existing Macs.
usb is an open standard. i imagine 3rd party support to be superb.
So, I have to pay at least 79,99 USD just to connect an external display and/or any single USB device?
And then I also have to buy an extra HDMI to DisplayPort adaptor/cable for all of my DisplayPort monitors without HDMI (which is, like, most of them), since Apple doesn’t even have any USB-C to mini-DisplayPort adaptors? WTF? Are they declaring mini-DisplayPort dead, after only a few years of finishing up the switch over to Thunderbolt?
Why are they only selling adapters to connect MacBook to a “TV or projector”? What about the plentiful DisplayPort monitors?
For connecting external displays, they now seem to be pushing wireless via AirPlay as the desired solution. I haven’t yet been in a conference room or classroom with a projector that supports that, though, so I carry around both VGA and HDMI dongles.
Ha, it’s interesting how experiences differ. I was more like “damn, apple got into that market fast”. AppleTVs everywhere, from startups to enterprise for me.
Really? I mostly see Roku devices if someone has a little internet STB, mainly due to it supporting third-party applications.
What should I answer? Seriously: yes, but that’s just my anecdata.
On the contrary - I’m in the Midwest and my kids go to a smaller public school - Apple TV is - literally - in every classroom.
I’m also a software development consultant - almost every conference room I end up in has an Apple TV on the monitor.
Interesting. I’ve never seen AppleTVs in a university classroom, in either Denmark or the US. Most of our classrooms in Denmark have projector systems that are about 5-7 years old, with VGA/DVI connectors. A few more recently refurbished ones have recently (2012-2014) added HDMI connectors. I think they’re currently waiting to see what will win out before doing further upgrades. There was a proposal to add HDMI everywhere, but they didn’t want to spend the money unless they were sure HDMI would be the connector of choice for the next 5 years or so. It might be that jumping straight to wireless is what happens.
Yeah; that might be a sticking point some places. I worked a place where it was an offence to plug anything into USB ports, and the security people were discussing plugging USB ports using a hot-glue gun. Possibly for the same reason, PS-2 mice and keyboards were preferred at this place.
you have to install node/npm to scaffold your asp.net mvc application? This is a troll, right?
shrug I guess I don’t see the issue with javascript? npm is increasingly just a package manager for javascript apps and modules..
You could surely use or write a different scaffolding engine. Or not use scaffolding at all. But the Yeoman scaffolding and generator-aspnet are there, easy to get, and they work.
The .NET Yeoman generator (!!!) he uses is here: https://www.npmjs.org/package/generator-aspnet. That’s pretty cool.
Heck ya, I’ve been using Yeoman for a while, it’s pretty awesome. Was really cool to see it used for a .Net app!
I appreciate the conversation and that assumptions about Scrum are being challenged. And I agree that Scrum is not a silver bullet.
But I’ve seen planning poker work. It does not always go like the author’s anecdote. If some dev just barks “20 points? REALLY?” when the team is trying to come to an estimate, that dev is an asshole and you’ve got larger problems.
And I’ve seen morning standups work too. Someone has to be tasked with keeping the team on task. The conservation needs to be limited to what happened yesterday, what happens today, and what blockers can the PM tackle for the team.
I’ve seen this work in large organizations. I’m not talking about an 8 person start-up. Just because it’s not universally applicable or successful doesn’t mean it needs to die in a fire.
(Nice troll style points for the title and the image of “Visual Studio TFS” branded planning poker cards though.)
Agreed. I also think the article misses massively on the “Why are we supposed to think developers are not business people?” It’s more the case that developers are not necessarily subject matter experts on the business subjects. Your US-based developer is going to understand international finance issues better than the international accounting folks? Please tell me more of all the magical unicorns you’ve employed who hold better subject matter expertise than.. well… those who work in the subjects.
I’ve noticed that developers themselves are very prone to the misconception that being good at writing software makes them good at everything that their software deals with. particularly annoying is when they have some reductive argument that they are convinced is correct because everyone else is clearly just overcomplicating things.
Also, planning poker isn’t scrum in the same way that syrup isn’t pancakes. Some people use them together, sure. But it’s a pretty weak argument.
On the other hand, there’s something to be said about how common it is to do “scrum plus” or “scrum but.” (And, indeed, much has been written about this, and a fair bit more coherently as well.)
It’s both a criticism and a mundane fact that scrum doesn’t reliability fix every organizational misstep within a group and the groups with which it must interact. It’s not a very opinionated framework, and so it tends to attract opinions, both in favor of planning poker and the like, and against.
They can’t even get the FAQ right with regard to the Yankees, so I can’t take this seriously at all.
As Markdown’s creator Gruber has noted - “ambiguity is a feature.”
Sure, that’s a tongue-in-cheek observation. But I haven’t had any issue using Markdown for the last decade. I don’t agree with an arbitrary handful of devs/personalities defining the “standard.”
Are the millions of existing documents classified as “legacy Markdown” now?
After OpenSSL which other venerable yet dusty codebases deserve the fork/cleanup treatment?
venerable or vulnerable? :)
Same thing for me. ;]
HA that’s pretty good. I was trying to give OpenSSL a slight touch of respect with that adjective. Everyone’s flat-out trashing it so no need for me to pile on there.
I still think instead of disparaging OpenSSL post-mortem, our time would be better spent turning our eyes to the next one.
yep