News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by nostrademons on Friday April 03, 2026 @02:35PM (#47630316)
It's also worth remembering that markdown tried very hard to encode conventions that were already used in Usenet, email, and other text media. A > to indicate a quote was widespread Usenet convention. Asterisks or underscores to indicate emphasis was also a common convention; both are legal because both were common. Double asterisk or double underscores to indicate really, really emphasizing something was also a common convention. So were asterisks to display a bulleted list, blank lines to separate paragraphs, and indenting 4+ spaces to write code.

It's a good example of "pave the path" design philosophy, where you do what users are already doing rather than trying to impose some platonic ideal of what the world should be like. And it works quite well at that.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by singpolyma3 on Friday April 03, 2026 @02:41PM (#47630405)
Stepped right on the rake though because it uses sigils which were common, but requires they be used in uncommon ways (by doubling etc) which it why most chat UIs don't actually use markdown
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by packetlost on Friday April 03, 2026 @04:06PM (#47631550)
Somehow basically only Discord gets it almost perfectly right though.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by devmor on Saturday April 04, 2026 @10:04AM (#47639180)
Which is very recent. Discord only added full markdown support a couple years ago.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by packetlost on Saturday April 04, 2026 @12:33PM (#47640571)
Even when they only had a subset, that subset was correct
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by reaperducer on Friday April 03, 2026 @02:40PM (#47630399)
markdown tried very hard to encode conventions that were already used in Usenet, email, and other text media

For those of you who weren't there:

  *bold*

  _underline_

  ~strikethrough~

  /italics/

  > Quotation

  - list
  - list
  - list
I've been using these for almost half a century. They're much easier and more intuitive than Markdown. I see no compelling reason to change.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by nostrademons on Friday April 03, 2026 @03:26PM (#47631005)
Your quotation and list syntax should work out of the box in most Markdown flavors (HN has a very non-standard and crippled version - basically nothing other than italics, paragraphs, and code/preformatting works.)

Strikethrough and bold are doubled to avoid common ambiguities. Your underline should technically work, but it comes out as an <em> (emphasis) tag, which is rendered as italics in most browsers.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by 8n4vidtmkvmk on Saturday April 04, 2026 @01:07AM (#47635970)
What ambiguities are there with bold?
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by nickloewen on Saturday April 04, 2026 @01:28AM (#47636086)
Suppose you want to use asterisks to mark footnotes.* As soon as you add a second footnote,** you're in trouble because your asterisks disappear and everything between them turns bold.

* I had to escape all of these asterisks.

** I see this happen fairly often to people's comments here.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by 8n4vidtmkvmk on Saturday April 04, 2026 @02:20AM (#47636378)
Disappearing asterisks is just terrible UX. It should turn bold but keep the asterisk displayed so you can still edit as normal.

The bullet point problem is fixed by only bolding when the asterisks are on either end of word characters.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by registeredcorn on Saturday April 04, 2026 @03:45AM (#47636843)
What ought, amn't
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by eviks on Saturday April 04, 2026 @05:49AM (#47637561)
> It should turn bold but keep the asterisk displayed so you can still edit as normal.

This is just terrible UI, why do you need garbage marks when you already have bold? And you can edit "as normal" if you like, but that only requires displaying asterisks during that tiny % of time you edit the word, not all the time when you read it or edit something else.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by localuser13 on Saturday April 04, 2026 @06:02AM (#47637638)
This is just a personal preference. I strongly prefer to see the markup as I write it. I can't stand disappearing characters.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by eviks on Saturday April 04, 2026 @07:32AM (#47638108)
Do you enable visibility of tab and space?
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by reaperducer on Saturday April 04, 2026 @06:55PM (#47644390)
I do!
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by duskdozer on Saturday April 04, 2026 @09:50AM (#47639063)
So you can still see the actual text that you're editing. And to reduce ambiguity. If you don't leave them, then you can't distinguish between adding more bold text to currently bold text or adding non-bold text immediately after
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by eviks on Saturday April 04, 2026 @09:59AM (#47639136)
> So you can still see the actual text that you're editing

But you're not editing that text! You're editing some other text and see a bunch of asterisks all over the place. And this is especially bad in nested styles - try some colored bold word in a table cell - without hiding the markup you'll basically lose most of visibility into the text/table layout

> to reduce ambiguity

it does the opposite, you can't easily distinguish between an asterisk and an asterisk, which is... ambiguity

> can't distinguish between adding more bold text to currently bold text or adding non-bold text immediately

Sure you can. In a well-designed editor you'll see the style indicator right near your caret is so it's always obvious whether and how your typed text is styled or not.

In a not-so-well-designed editor you'll get that indicator far away from your caret or just get asterisks appearing when you need them.

In a not-designed editor you'll see them all the time even when they don't serve any purpose.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by saltcured on Saturday April 04, 2026 @05:49PM (#47643828)
Ha, I remember this religious debate all the way back in the days of text-mode word processing in the 80s on CP/M and PC. I was indoctrinated in the WordStar camp where style controls were visible in the editor between actual text characters, so you could move the cursor between them and easily decide to insert text inside or outside the styled region. This will forever seem a more coherent editing UI to me.

This might be why I also liked LaTeX. The markup itself is semantic and meant to help me understand what I am editing. It isn't just some keyboard-shortcut to inject a styling command. It is part of the document structure.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by eviks on Saturday April 04, 2026 @10:50PM (#47645707)
> easily decide to insert text inside or outside the styled region.

Only for the 3 primitive styles that were supported? 3 table cells of RedBold GreenLowerCaps BlueUnderlineItalic isn't easy anymore

But also - there wasn't a single app in the 80s with a different easy approach, right? So removing noise had a downside.

> styling command. It is part of the document structure.

Not for the most used markdown markers, where styling = semantic.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by saltcured on Sunday April 05, 2026 @01:32PM (#47651766)
Heh, I'm not even sure WordStart other styles at that level. Changing the color back then would mean having the print job pause and the screen prompt you to change ink ribbon and press a key to continue. I can't remember if it could also prompt to change the daisy wheel, or whether font was a global property of the document. The daisy wheels did have a slant/italic set, so it could select those alternate glyphs on the fly from the same wheel. Bold and underline were done by composition, using overstrike, rather than separate glyphs.

But yeah, this tension you are describing is also where other concepts like "paragraph styles" bothered me in later editors. I think I want/expect "span styles" so it is always a container of characters with a semantic label, which I could then adjust later in the definitions.

Decades later, it still repulses me how the paragraph styles devolve into a bunch of undisciplined characters with custom styling when I have to work on shared documents. At some point, the only sane recourse is to strip all custom styling and then go back and selectively apply things like emphasis again, hoping you didn't miss any.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by eszed on Sunday April 05, 2026 @12:55PM (#47651316)
Same, same.

And... I preferred WordPerfect's separate "reveal codes" pane, which reduced the opportunity for ambiguity. WP 5.1 has never been equalled as a general-purpose word processor.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by roblh on Saturday April 04, 2026 @10:45AM (#47639502)
For the love of god, yes. Slack is the worst for this with backticks. Editing the start/end points is a giant pain.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by bnjms on Saturday April 04, 2026 @12:02PM (#47640236)
Asterisk * has other uses too. Even more common than footnotes would be x*y=42 X=42/y

HN automatically finds this example and puts in escapes to make it work.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by dingaling on Friday April 03, 2026 @03:29PM (#47631051)
But Usenet style didn't have a trendy name, an 'inventor' or Github stars. So it didn't exist.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by geerlingguy on Friday April 03, 2026 @09:58PM (#47634846)
GitHub stars weren't a thing when Markdown was roughly codified. Was GitHub even around then?
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by Jtsummers on Saturday April 04, 2026 @09:32AM (#47638932)
Git wasn't even around.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by beautron on Saturday April 04, 2026 @01:08AM (#47635976)
One problem with the /italics/ form is that it's not convenient when writing about filesystem paths (though I do like its visual indication of slanting).
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by _bernd on Saturday April 04, 2026 @11:28AM (#47639861)
A path should be written `/root`...
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by bnjms on Saturday April 04, 2026 @11:52AM (#47640124)
I agree that file paths should be in `backticks`.

Or italics can be //double slash// to avoid ambiguities with file paths. That still leaves the windows style //some/file/path as ambiguous But I’ll never accept single * as natural for italics.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by AceyMan on Saturday April 04, 2026 @11:04PM (#47645768)
Try finding the backtick on a mobile phone keyboard in less than a minute, tho. So very annoying. (SwiftKey I'm look at you, bud.)
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by mcv on Saturday April 04, 2026 @05:21AM (#47637383)
Yeah, *asterisks* for italic has always felt wrong to me. I can understand underscores if slashes cause confusion with file paths.

*bold* and _italic_ would have been better.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by Mordisquitos on Saturday April 04, 2026 @09:25AM (#47638869)
I agree that using *asterisks* just feels wrong for italics, and are much better suited for bold. However, surely the _underscore_ is just perfect to visually indicate underlining?

As for /slashes/, which would visually be perfect for italics, the only reason they conflict between italics and filepaths is the fact that in both cases they are expected to be used at the beginning and end of a word. Maybe using an unnatural placement of )parentheses( could have worked as a non-conflicting indicator of italics.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by politician on Saturday April 04, 2026 @10:16AM (#47639276)
_underscore_ for italics conflicts with most identifiers in most languages.

Markdown was created in an era before the web had easily used components for structural syntax highlighting (tree-sitter) and where reliance on regex-based approaches was more common.

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by sudahtigabulan on Sunday April 05, 2026 @12:01AM (#47646009)
> Maybe using an unnatural placement of )parentheses( could have worked as a non-conflicting indicator of italics.

Using different delimiter for opening and closing is a good idea on its own, too. I think it makes parsing simpler and unambiguous wrt nesting.

I've imagined something like this:

  `(monospace)
  _(underline)
  /(italics)
  ~(overstrike)
Probably looks a bit more distracting, though.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by IIsi50MHz on Tuesday April 07, 2026 @03:09PM (#47679952)
> Maybe using an unnatural placement of )parentheses( could have worked

O, c'mon! That is clearly a giant heading in a display font, squeezed in the middle and wider at the top and bottom. (-;

Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by johannesrexx on Sunday April 05, 2026 @08:49PM (#47655608)
Like Typst does ;-)
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by alisonatwork on Saturday April 04, 2026 @07:43AM (#47638173)
Thanks for posting this. I feel like for years we've been getting gaslit by the Markdown guys who inexplicably decided that stars should make text go italic instead of bold. I get it wrong every single time and then have to go back and look up a cheat sheet. It really isn't intuitive at all, and it also doesn't codify how we used to write before rich text entry boxes where available everywhere. Markdown reminds me more of all the custom wiki and forum markups that proliferated in the 2000s than any text-based conventions in use prior.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by tmalsburg2 on Saturday April 04, 2026 @10:11AM (#47639225)
Org-mode FTW
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by TRiG_Ireland on Saturday April 04, 2026 @08:34PM (#47644990)
I have historically used asterisks for emphasis and slashes for the use/mention distinction.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by oftenwrong on Sunday April 05, 2026 @09:36AM (#47649313)
I have long used underscores for _emphasis_, but I never made the connection that it was meant to resemble an underline until now.
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by je42 on Saturday April 04, 2026 @03:43AM (#47636829)
Writing mark down linter, i am i nterested in - if you think that you requirements for markdown formatting could be encoded in (relatively) simple rules?
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by guerrilla on Saturday April 04, 2026 @04:06AM (#47636965)
Just search "Markdown grammar"
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by bityard on Saturday April 04, 2026 @06:27AM (#47637763)
Check out commonmark
Re:Why the heck are we still using Markdown? by spartanatreyu on Monday April 06, 2026 @09:03PM (#47669454)
Commommark is the best, then looking at the most commonly implemented extensions:

- Superscript with hat symbol (^)

- Hidden content (also known as spoiler tags, content warnings, click-to-reveal, etc...) with two pipe symbols (||) at start and end of hidden content. Interact with the content to show the content inside.

- Table syntax to show tabular data and align content with pipe, hyphen, colon symbols

---

After that, I'd look at the extensions that are only useful for the use-case you're targeting:

- Subscripting with tilde symbol (~)

- IDs, Classes and Attributes

- Task lists

- Sections / Containers

- Language labels for code blocks

- Math Support (mathml, latex, katex, etc...)

- Table of Contents / Footnotes

- Definition lists

- etc...