Jacob Rus wrote on 7/8/07 at 8:05 PM:
> >That's what I'm thinking the output should be. I think there should be
> >an official rule that all block-level constructs must be separated by
> >a blank line.
> This sounds just terrible to me. I don't want to require huge numbers of
> blank lines whenever I want deeply nested lists, etc.
Nested lists are an exception. I think conceptually, a nested
hierarchical list is, to the writer, a single thing.
My plan for lists is to simplify them as follows:
* A list is a series of list items.
* If any of the items in a list are separated by a *single*
blank line, the entire list is in paragraph mode, and the
contents of each item in the list will be wrapped in `
* Otherwise, the list is not in paragraph mode and none of the
items' contents get `
* Two consecutive blank lines ends the current list, no exceptions.
So you can still do this:
And the output will be the same as currently.
But if you do this:
* sub-one with something that looks like
* sub-two with something that looks like
then *all* of the list items will be paragraph mode.
The "double blank line to end list" rule means you'll be able to write
To generate two consecutive lists.
The "must precede blocks with a blank line" rule also means that any
list item that contains block-level constructs, like blockquotes or
code blocks, will put that list into paragraph mode.
> People don't always use such blank lines when they write
> (non-markdown) plain text emails or documents, and I think mandating
> them in general is a mistake.
People do all sorts of things in non-Markdown plain text that can't be
parsed in Markdown.