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
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...
Answer
#5: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2024-04-03T12:09:57Z (about 1 month 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
Andreas from the dark caverns
·
2024-04-02T23:01:31Z (about 1 month 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
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
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
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?