Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Post History

80%
+6 −0
Q&A Add support for AsciiDoc syntax

I have some concerns: Complexity AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that m...

posted 3mo ago by meta user‭  ·  edited 2mo ago by trichoplax‭

Answer
#5: Post edited by user avatar trichoplax‭ · 2024-04-03T12:09:57Z (about 2 months ago)
Convert asterisk note to markdown footnote for ease of use
  • I have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • I have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort[^1] but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • [^1]: I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for.
#4: Post edited by user avatar Andreas from the dark caverns‭ · 2024-04-02T23:01:31Z (about 2 months ago)
Remove fluff (no need to write out obvious statements)
  • Nice feature request! I am not the one who downvoted but I certainly have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • ### What do you think?
  • I have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
#3: Post edited by user avatar meta user‭ · 2024-02-24T02:18:13Z (3 months ago)
  • Nice feature request! I am not the one who downvotes but I certainly have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • ### What do you think?
  • Nice feature request! I am not the one who downvoted but I certainly have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • ### What do you think?
#2: Post edited by user avatar meta user‭ · 2024-02-24T02:17:51Z (3 months ago)
  • Nice feature request! But I have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • ### What do you think?
  • Nice feature request! I am not the one who downvotes but I certainly have some concerns:
  • Complexity
  • -
  • AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.
  • Worth
  • -
  • Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).
  • *(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)
  • So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?
  • Editing
  • -
  • You mentioned that
  • > I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.
  • While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.
  • This poses a problem for editing.
  • If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.
  • ### What do you think?
#1: Initial revision by user avatar meta user‭ · 2024-02-24T02:17:03Z (3 months ago)
Nice feature request! But I have some concerns:

Complexity
-
AsciiDoc is unnecessarily complicated. From what I have seen, Codidact runs just fine on Markdown. Even much larger platform Stack Overflow doesn't seem in that much need of it, despite AsciiDoc having more features.

Worth
-
Considering the votes on this feature request, it seems that not a lot of users are interested. It seems like something that requires high effort* but gives low value in return (considering not a lot of users will use this option).

*(I'm not sure if this is just a two-minute implementation - but I think it will take time - to first add the option - then make the documentation for it in the Help Center - that too for all communities - and this isn't even taking into account the customizations some communities may have asked for)

So a question that may be considered is- Is it worth the limited developer time?

Editing
-
You mentioned that

> I would expect a per-user default configuration and a possible toggle at the bottom of posts.

While it is nice to have a per-user default configuration - think about it. This will divide all the posts into Markdown ones and AsciiDoc ones.

This poses a problem for editing.

If someone fluent with Markdown (which I think most active users are by now) wants to help and make the site better, there will be a "formatting-language" barrier that they will have to overcome if they come across a poorly written AsciiDoc post. Vice-versa for when someone fluent with AsciiDoc wants to improve a poorly written Markdown post. While I guess this barrier will not be so big, but it certainly poses an inconvenience.

### What do you think?