So, the intent was to make it simpler to interface with text formatting in HTML. Markdown was designed to make it easier for web writers to work with articles in an age where web publishing required writing HTML.
This is important to remember when you, the reader, develop technology for others to use. For many of us, I suspect Markdown is something we just take for granted as a “thing that exists.” But all technology has a history and is a product of human interaction. That is also why I want to build my advice against Markdown by looking back on why it was introduced in the first place, and by going through some of the major developments of content on the web. There’s little doubt that Markdown brings convenience for developers in some use cases.
And it makes sense that a README.md file can be opened and edited in a code editor and rendered nicely on GitHub. I once spent days building an impressive MultiMarkdown-> LaTeX-> real-time-PDF-preview-pipeline in Sublime Text for my academic writing. Markdown comes with an impressive ecosystem and from a developer’s standpoint, there is an elegant simplicity to plain-text files and easy-to-parse syntax for people who are used to reading code. Even I, when highly motivated, have given up contributing to open-source documentation because the component-based Markdown implementation introduced too much friction.īut I also see the other side of the coin. We have spent hours (and client’s money) on building custom tag-renderers that were never used because people don’t have time or motivation to use the syntax. I have observed people struggle with Markdown syntax, and be demotivated in their jobs as editors and content creators.
So, there’s skin in the game, but I hope I’m able to portray that even though I’ll argue against Markdown as the go-to format for content, I still have a deep appreciation for its significance, application, and legacy.īefore my current gig, I worked as a technology consultant at an agency where we had to literally fight CMSes that locked our client’s content down by embedding it in presentation and complex data models (yes, even the open-source ones).
At Sanity.io, we spend most of our days thinking about how content as data unlocks a lot of value, and we spend a lot of time thinking deeply about editor experiences, and how to save people time, and make working with digital content delightful. Of course, this stance is influenced by working for a platform for structured content. Markdown holds editorial experience back.Markdown wasn’t designed to meet today’s needs of content.While Markdown is still fine for some things, I don’t believe it’s should be the go-to for content anymore. But since its introduction, the world of digital content has also changed. Markdown is a signifier for the developer and text-tinkerer culture. That’s almost 20 years ago - yikes! What started as a more writer- and reader-friendly syntax for HTML has become a darling for how to write and store technical prose for programmers and tech-savvy people. Markdown’s syntax is intended for one purpose: to be used as a format for writing for the web. Looking back, I remember starting typing in Markdown not long after John Gruber released his first Perl-based parser back in 2004 after collaborating on the language with Aaron Swartz. Markdown is second nature for many of us. In this article, Knut shares his advice against Markdown by looking back on why it was introduced in the first place, and by going through some of the major developments of content on the web. However, it’s important to look at emerging content formats that try to encompass modern needs. Markdown in all its flavors, interpretations, and forks won’t go away.