> On 8 Apr 2024, at 22:30, Erik Wienhold <e...@ewie.name> wrote: > On 2024-04-08 21:29 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> I've only peeked at a couple of those READMEs, but they look alright so > far (at least on GitHub). Should we settle on a specific Markdown > flavor[1]? Because I'm never sure if some markups only work on > specific code-hosting sites. Probably, but if we strive for maintained textual readability with avoiding most of the creative markup then we're probably close to the original version. But I agree, it should be evaluated. > Maybe also a guide on writing Markdown > that renders properly, especially with regard to escaping that may be > necessary (see below). That's a good point, if we opt for an actual format there should be some form of documentation about that format, especially if we settle for using a fraction of the capabilities of the format. >> * In the regex README there are two file references using * as a wildcard, >> but >> the combination of the two makes Markdown render the text between them in >> italics. Wrapping these in backticks solves it, but I'm not a fan since we >> don't do that elsewhere. A solution which avoids backticks would ne nice. > > Escaping does the trick: regc_\*.c Right, but that makes the plaintext version less readable than the backticks I think. > Can be escaped as well: \<X> ..and same with this one. It's all very subjective though. -- Daniel Gustafsson
