david.chambers.05 at gmail.com
Thu May 31 00:46:16 EDT 2012
> What do you think about that? Godd idea? Crap?
Not a good idea, in my opinion. Markdown provides two ways to define links,
which are sufficient given that one provides the reusability you desire. As
a reader of a Markdown document, I prefer the links to be in one place
(generally at the bottom of the document). Inline links are fine, too. The
option you present would make it difficult to find the URL for a link via a
quick scan of a document.
On 30 May 2012 14:14, Alan Hogan <contact at alanhogan.com> wrote:
> I haven’t ever seen that used in plaintext writing before, which would
> make the syntax probably violate the principle of being derived from email
> list / plain text patterns.
> More concerning is that now potentially literal brackets that were
> adjacent to a link, if anyone had that, would now be linked and more
> importantly the link text would be hidden. But maybe that’s not so common.
> Personally, I don’t see why it’s a big problem to just define the link at
> the bottom if you want to use it in several places.
> But, you did get me thinking. It would be interesting if there was a magic
> named link, "ibid.", which always refer to the preceding link, in context.
> [One](http://one.example.com), [two][ibid.], [three][ibid.], [four],
> [four]: http://four.example.com
> Would generate three links to one.example.com and two to four.example.com.
> (If the user had manually defined a link named "ibid." then that would
> take precedence over the magic implementation. And of course, the first
> link in the document cannot be an 'ibid.' link; I suppose the behavior
> should be to either output a link with no href value or just emit the plain
> On May 30, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Jakob wrote:
> > Hi there! I wanted to drop a line on the markdown syntax used for links:
> > When i reference to [some website] and want to do [the same
> reference] later ai can only do this in endnote style (or howeer it's
> called). What i would want to be able to do is to make [an inline reference
> to a website](http://anotherexample.com) and be able to reuse [that
> reference] just the same.
> > What do you think about that? Godd idea? Crap?
> > Regards,
> > Jakov
> > : http://example.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> > Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Markdown-Discuss