Titus

@aidantwoods What is your view on this? ```markdown Foo Bar *is this emphasis*? ```

It is rather meaningless, in HTML. Although there is a difference: > If this attribute is omitted from an element, then it implies that the title attribute of the nearest...

Btw, I think this should be true for character escapes too: ```markdown [©]: a.com [\!]: b.com Both should link: [©], [!] ``` Yields: [©]: a.com [\!]: b.com Both should link:...

@jgm Is this something you agree with? I can create a PR to clarify the docs

I’m personally on the other side of this (https://github.com/commonmark/commonmark-spec/issues/653)

The current rules prevent shortcuts from forming links by not allowing them if they’re followed by an empty (`[]`), or a valid label (`[x]`, whether it matches or not). That...

Sorry, to clarify my intent: I do not propose removing shortcuts. I’m fine with shortcuts (`[w]`). I’m fine with collapsed (`[x][]`), and with full (`[y][z]`) references. But I want to...

Oh didn’t know there’s a babelmark@2. Works for me. 🤷‍♂️ Maybe try a different browser? Or, maybe this is obvious but just to be sure: it groups renderings with the...

I personally like to respond like so: ```markdown > 3. asd Response. > 8. asd Response. ``` --- HTML does allow a `value` attribute on `` elements, when in ``:...

How would this idea work with: ``` 1. a 2. b 2. c 1. d ``` And: ``` 4. a 3. b 2. c 1. d ```