[HN Gopher] Markdown Is Holding You Back
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Markdown Is Holding You Back
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 39 points
       Date   : 2025-11-22 20:03 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (newsletter.bphogan.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (newsletter.bphogan.com)
        
       | timpera wrote:
       | It's interesting to see how Markdown keeps getting more and more
       | use, and even native Windows Notepad support!
        
       | philipwhiuk wrote:
       | > If you're writing a quick README or a short-lived doc, Markdown
       | is fine. It's fast, approachable, and does the job. If you're
       | building a developer documentation site that needs some
       | structure, reStructuredText or AsciiDoc are better choices.
       | 
       | This is dumb. If I'm writing developer documentation I'm not
       | writing it for a machine. And if the aim here is to expose it to
       | a LLM, then the LLM needs to get smarter about semantics, not
       | force us back to formats that are more technically complex to
       | write and maintain in order to re-create 'the semantic web' - a
       | flawed concept that has failed to catch on.
       | 
       | If the LLM needs context on content that humans don't need, the
       | LLM needs fixing, not the content.
       | 
       | > With Markdown as your source, you can't easily go to another
       | format.
       | 
       | File->Print->PDF.
       | 
       | Was that hard? (I admit it's still bizarre that Chrome puts 'Save
       | As PDF' under Print).
       | 
       | (Apparently you can also go via LaTeX if you love a CLI)
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > If I'm writing developer documentation I'm not writing it for
         | a machine. And if the aim here is to expose it to a LLM, then
         | the LLM needs to get smarter about semantics, not force us back
         | to formats that are more technically complex to write and
         | maintain
         | 
         | AsciiDoc is much better than Markdown for docs _intended for
         | humans_ that are more than short, README type of documents. Any
         | advantage it has for documents intended for LLMs is a side
         | effect of that.
        
           | zihotki wrote:
           | Many consider AsciiDoc being too complex.
        
       | khaledh wrote:
       | Markdown won. Simplicity always wins. Markdown is now the de
       | facto documentation format, for better or for worse.
        
       | jimmar wrote:
       | Markdown is the minimum viable product. It's easy to learn and
       | still readable if not rendered in an alternate format. It's
       | great.
       | 
       | For making PDFs, I've recently moved from AsciiDoc to Typst. I
       | couldn't find a good way to get AsciiDoc to make accessible PDFs,
       | and I found myself struggling to control the output. Typst solves
       | all of AsciiDoc's problems for me.
       | 
       | But in the end, no markup language will make you write better.
       | It's kind of like saying that ballpoint pens are limiting your
       | writing, so you should switch to mechanical pencils.
        
         | undeveloper wrote:
         | typst looks interesting -- but how are you writing it? from
         | what I looked at, it looks like theres an official web editor
         | and a vscode plugin with limited support. this feels pretty
         | limited, as someone who came in expecting something like
         | obsidian.
        
           | TRiG_Ireland wrote:
           | I'm not aware of any limitations in the Tinymist plugin.
           | 
           | And you can just write it in the plain text editor of your
           | choice, and keep an eye on the PDF with typst watch.
        
       | nicoburns wrote:
       | This article doesnt consider Typst, which IMO ought to be the
       | first port of call if Markdown isnt sufficient for your needs.
        
         | perlgeek wrote:
         | I've used typst for generating PDFs before, how good is its
         | HTML output?
        
           | undeveloper wrote:
           | it looks like typst's html output is under construction [1].
           | 
           | 1: https://typst.app/docs/reference/html/
        
       | neoCrimeLabs wrote:
       | > Markdown Lacks the Structure You Need
       | 
       | I feel like this article makes a lot of valid observations, but
       | then wraps them with a false dilemma.
       | 
       | If it had tried to convince the reader of understanding what
       | formatting needs are required before choosing a format, I would
       | have entirely agreed with it.
       | 
       | Instead I'm left feeling mildly offended, and disagree with it.
        
       | dschuessler wrote:
       | You can include arbitrary HTML tags in Markdown at any place you
       | need them.[0] I am not aware of any Markdown tooling that does
       | not support this.
       | 
       | So, no, Markdown is not holding me back. It is perfectly capable
       | of what the author claims it isn't.
       | 
       | [0]: https://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html
        
         | henrebotha wrote:
         | There are real limitations to this: You can't arbitrarily mix
         | and match HTML and Markdown. As soon as you introduce an HTML
         | block, you're locked out of Markdown syntax.
         | 
         | AsciiDoc lets you mix and match however you want. Or, put
         | differently: AsciiDoc's superiority over Markdown extends even
         | to being better at shelling out to HTML.
        
           | tefkah wrote:
           | mdx does tho. you could just not define any components, then
           | you can nest markdown inside html no problem
        
       | johnathandos wrote:
       | It's good to spread awareness (or just remind folks) that
       | alternatives to Markdown exist. The right tool for the job
       | depends on your circumstances. If I were scaling a docset for a
       | team of contributors primarily consisting of technical writers,
       | .adoc or .rst would be my preference. If I were scaling internal
       | docs-as-code infra for software engineers, I'd use Markdown.
        
       | prmoustache wrote:
       | The author seems to forget that markdown is just an extension of
       | html. If markdown doesn't provide something that html does, you
       | just write it in html and it will be rendered correctly.
       | 
       | I'd also argue that the limitations of markdown allow me to focus
       | on actual content and less on the presentation. I have little use
       | of all the features of a markup language if I can't remember how
       | to use them.
        
         | dardeaup wrote:
         | Wow! TIL!
        
         | nrhrjrjrjtntbt wrote:
         | It is not features but structure and undetstanding that is
         | missing.
         | 
         | That said I am not sure what the solution is to that since your
         | docs may need structure my docs dont need. Therefore you cant
         | solve the "semantic" outside of a "namespace" of what you agree
         | in your organization.
         | 
         | E.g. you may decide architecture diagrams are in Mermaid but
         | that is by no means a stanfard and my org uses embeded svg.
         | 
         | So to go full circle... you are right just use HTML. After all
         | it's semantic isn't it ;-)
        
       | dardeaup wrote:
       | This is a timely topic for me. I'm just beginning the writing of
       | a technical book. I plan to target epub/mobi. My research thus
       | far has pointed to markdown -> html -> epub/mobi. If you were
       | going to write a technical ebook would you use markdown or an
       | alternative?
        
         | codybontecou wrote:
         | What about markdown do you feel limits you in your writing
         | process?
         | 
         | The beauty of markdown is that it's standardized. If you find
         | your self midway through the book and feel a need to change
         | formats, it's easy enough to parse and reformat.
        
           | dardeaup wrote:
           | Nothing! I was asking from the point of you that you don't
           | know what you don't know.
        
         | macintux wrote:
         | You might look at DocBook. I haven't used it in ~25 years, and
         | then only for short documents, and it is XML hence quite
         | verbose.
         | 
         | But it's explicitly targeted at technical documentation. If
         | nothing else, searching for DocBook alternatives might give you
         | some ideas.
        
         | WA wrote:
         | You need:
         | 
         | - table of contents
         | 
         | - automatic chapter and section numbering
         | 
         | - cross references and automatic tracking of figures, tables
         | etc.
         | 
         | - different styles besides blockquotes such as info sections,
         | warnings, tips
         | 
         | Imho, cross-referencing chapters, pages, figures, tables and
         | the lack thereof in Markdown is the first and most important
         | thing to check how you would like this to be solved.
        
       | nathias wrote:
       | is this a poignant satire about programmers?
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | The paper makes the point that people keep extending Markdown,
       | badly and incompatibly.
        
       | autogn0me wrote:
       | I would like to point out that asciidork provides ability to get
       | AST representation of asciidoc. It's very nice package. Not the
       | author but have used it.
       | 
       | https://github.com/jaredh159/asciidork
        
       | sroerick wrote:
       | Org is pretty good.
        
       | gbanfalvi wrote:
       | The other options look like garbage tho
        
       | jrm4 wrote:
       | Feels like a great argument...for, I don't know, a bunch of
       | moderately technical high-schoolers who were somehow raised on
       | markdown instead of Microsoft Word and want more power?
       | 
       | No, seriously, who is this for?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-22 23:00 UTC)