Formatting with Markdown
-
ruario last edited by
Leushino's post seems completely on topic to me. He is testing Markdown and tried one HTML tag. Using
*is not a massive problem because if support was dropped most posts would still make perfect sense, without the emphasis provided by italics.More risky, would be to use tables for layout (as I actually did in the initial post) or changing <font color="red">text</font> <font color="blue">colour</font> to indicate certain things. If these possibilities disappear your posting could potentially cease to make sense in the future.
These are the kinds of things to keep in mind if you choose to use additional HTML tags. If you know your posting will still work without them, then it doesn't really matter if you use them. On the flip side, perhaps you don't even need them in that case.
I risked using tables above because I am willing to maintain and update my posting if it breaks, since I intend it as a guide, rather than just a comment I later forget about.
P.S. @leushino You forgot to close your
*tag with*(once you were done with italicising text). It actually looked OK this time but could mess things up in some scenarios. I have added it for you now as a quick edit. -
ruario last edited by
HTML analogies are given for the reference.
Actually the ones that correspond directly to Markdown should be safe, so if you could use them directly if you prefer. Not sure why you would though. It takes much longer to write out all the tags.
-
ruario last edited by
@joshl It is funny to see you tell Leushino he should only be using Markdown in this thread when you are abusing the
<abbr>tag to do things it is not intended for in one of the posts in this same thread.<abbr>is specifically designed for expanding abbreviations and acronyms. Not for displaying random, unrelated messages on mouseover. -
A Former User last edited by admin
Tell us about "calling Elvis" and using hash as it has output in this comment - are they part of this Markdown?
I already approached testing them in my thread, but it remained unclear about certain functionality. -
ruario last edited by
Calling Elvis???
You mean the fact that when he typed "#1" it generated a search link. Honestly I am not sure what that is about but I expect the poster did not intend it, so I have escaped it for him.
-
ruario last edited by
Ok, I had a look, hashtag search links (making a search link by putting # in front) is a feature of the forum software we use.
It is <em style='font-style: italic'>definitely not</em> Markdown but can be escaped the same way, by putting a \ in front of the #.
-
A Former User last edited by
Have you ever heard of Reddit? I would guess so, given they have 174 million users. Their comment box also uses Markdown and only includes a simple link to formatting help. Is it chaos? Yes! But not because of the formatting!
I have heard of Reddit, but I've never used it.
If they use Markdown then I guess it must be OK of course, but I still prefer traditional forum formatting controls I'm afraid!
How to achieve the desired formatting is much more obvious with those, to me at least.
-
ruario last edited by
Ok, looks like we got to the bottom of the broken emphasis thing. I'm not going to promise it will be fixed shortly because fixes are rolled out in batches but hopefully it won't take too long. I'll explain in more detail when it is fixed. Its kinda silly.
-
-
ruario last edited by
Whose silly?
It, not who is silly. In this case it meaning, "the mistake that caused the problem with missing emphasis".
Or to put that another way, perhaps I should have written:
The mistake that caused the problem (with missing emphasis), is silly.
-
A Former User last edited by
Whose silly?
It, not who is silly. In this case it meaning,...
No, you didn't write that - you wrote "its silly", so my simple question stays valid. (And yes, if I wanted to write "who's" - I would have done exactly that. The question is - why would I have
(wanted to)?) -
ruario last edited by
It's meaning "it is" and yes I should have written an apostrophe. Are you purposely trying to misunderstand me? It feels like it.
so my simple question stays valid
Ok, I now think you meant to say "What's silly?".
In any case, I specifically said:
I'll explain in more detail when it is fixed.
That has not happened yet, so what exactly do you want?
-
A Former User last edited by
Ok, I now think you meant to say "What's silly?".
Nope.
...I should have written an apostrophe. Are you purposely trying to misunderstand me? It feels like it.
They are "different words" in English. I do not purposely try to misunderstand - I try to understand what is literally written <q title="You're one IN CHARGE here, so you're not a simple user who can be let go on unnoticed, officer.">(I try not to let myself "understand" people's deviations - especially with native Brits and people in charge - by which allowing them to notice those themselves; nothing personal)</q>.
-
blackbird71 last edited byThis seems to apply here:
“ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant” - Alan Greenspan, Chairman, US Federal Reserve (1987-2006)
-
A Former User last edited by
[Modded out as it is not helpful to the discussion. Use your own thread and stop cross posting]
<!--
Four spaces ("sub"lines) within a list don't seem to make any difference to the output.
This is entirely as expected since Markdown and (HTML for that matter) cuts all whitespace (spaces, tabs and line breaks) down to a single space, unless marked up otherwise.
I meant what?
You said earlier about using such "4 spaced lines" to show codes in this Markdown, right?
Then I went to another 'forum' with a similar markup (media.info) and tried to show some input there. You know what? Only the "four-spaced line" worked with some.-->
-
ruario last edited by
Ok, emphasis works now and we have changed the help page to have instructions like those I wrote above. We also link them from the note below the comments input field. Hope that helps everyone.
-
ruario last edited by
The emphasis thing was just a stupid <abbr title="Cascading Style Sheets">CSS<abbr> typo. Previously I thought (assumed) it was down to the software we use for converting Markdown to HTML. However, I was viewing the source code of a page on the forums where I tried to use it and saw that
<em>tags were actually present.Basically we had
<em>set tofont-style:inherit. Of course, within comments on the forum<em>'s parent will almost always be a<p>tag or something else withfont-style:normal, rather thanfont-style:italicas you would expect for<em>. Thus, no Italics.Ah well, fixed now!
-
ruario last edited by
It will be interesting to see how many posts suddenly get emphasis, that was there all along but never displayed until now.
-
Deleted User last edited by
@ruario Emoticons menu don't show up when editing a post, check that please.
-
