Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Markdown vs. HTML in a CMS

Tags:

html

php

markdown

I'm working on a fairly large CMS-like app that includes a forum, wiki pages, etc. What whould you chose between Markdown and HTML? I'm concerned about usability and the fact non-techie people will use this.

  • Markdown has a very simple syntax but few users know it
  • with HTML you can use a WYSIWYG editor but they are often terrible
like image 749
Radu Potop Avatar asked Dec 16 '09 00:12

Radu Potop


People also ask

Is Markdown better than HTML?

Markdown is easier to write than HTML, and it's easier for most humans to read Markdown source than HTML source. However, HTML is more expressive (particularly regarding semantic tagging) and can achieve some specific effects that might be difficult or impossible in Markdown.

Will Markdown replace HTML?

Markdown was not intended to replace HTML, but to augment it — it is meant as a writing tool, whereas HTML is a publishing format. Accordingly, its syntax is small: it addresses the subset of HTML tags that specify things which could be conveyed in plain text.

Is Markdown just HTML?

Markdown's syntax is intended for one purpose: to be used as a format for writing for the web. Markdown is not a replacement for HTML, or even close to it. Its syntax is very small, corresponding only to a very small subset of HTML tags. The idea is not to create a syntax that makes it easier to insert HTML tags.

Why Markdown is used?

Markdown is a lightweight markup language for creating formatted text using a plain-text editor. John Gruber and Aaron Swartz created Markdown in 2004 as a markup language that is appealing to human readers in its source code form.


2 Answers

I vote for Markdown.

  1. I picked up Markdown in maybe 5 minutes in writing my first response here. Later I learned more than what I picked up here, but I'd think this to be rather standard.

  2. Markdown is much simpler to get good markup out of, and if you're worried about speed just cache the resulting output.

  3. Markdown is often better, and more easily understood, in plain text than HTML is in a WYSIWYG editor. Also, no-script friendly.

And if you've got a user who wants an embeded object, just drop the HTML code from that Youtube video in and it'll get carried over.

like image 87
Robert K Avatar answered Oct 04 '22 21:10

Robert K


If usability is an issue, and the target audience is non-geeks, WYSIWYG wins over Markdown. People are used to the toolbars with formatting buttons, but Markdown is a completely unknown markup language to most people (even "markup language" is completely unknown!).

I've had to explain a Markdown-lookalike wiki syntax to non-geeks at work, and they don't love it. When you want to write something, you want to write something, not look up weird ASCII syntax. Try not to interrupt the users' flow.

I would find a good WYSIWYG editor, like the one in WordPress (TinyMCE). It works ok.

like image 21
Christian Davén Avatar answered Oct 04 '22 21:10

Christian Davén