this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2024
71 points (93.8% liked)
Fediverse
27910 readers
1 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You'd think they would have worked on the spoiler one first, slightly more important than making your text look interesting.
They seem to be having some difficulties but it is being worked on: https://github.com/aeharding/voyager/issues/9
I think it's because spoiler tags in lemmy have been custom-made for some reason, whereas all the other stuff is standard markdown. Voyager is a web app, so it can maybe only render whatever the engine it relies on can render.
Edit: Turns out I'm 2 for 2 on making incorrect statements in this comment.
I’m pretty sure spoiler tags are just not part of the markdown specification. This would mean it’s probably easy enough for an application developer to just take the raw comment and pass it to what I assume would be a markdown rendering library (haven’t done app dev much), but spoiler tags won’t work without some additional work.
Yeah, this. Remark, the markdown library Voyager uses, is very powerful but also extremely complex (it has to be, to deal with Markdown edge cases).
I made a bit of progress last week on a custom plugin but it’s a lot of work. There’s like 4 layers of parsing required.
I wish Lemmy used GFM spoilers, which just uses normal details and summary html tags. But alas.
It’s really annoying there’s no standard markdown syntax in common mark.
A quick Google suggests you're correct - big sites have implemented their own versions, but it looks like everyone has spent the last decade arguing with other about a CommonMark standard.
It’s not just a web app anymore.