Skip to main content
Commonmark migration
Source Link

I am just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

See also: Markdown footnotes?

I am just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

I am just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

See also: Markdown footnotes?

Active reading.
Source Link

JustI am just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

Just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

I am just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

Just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?Markdown footnotes?

Just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

Just noticing that when we reviewed these proposals a while back, this one never got updated even as the corresponding one on DBAs did.

tl;dr: Implementing this in a way that wouldn't allow authors to break some / all page layouts, whether inadvertently or maliciously, is not feasible.

I know. It sucks. But that's HTML tables for ya.

###See also: Markdown footnotes?

replaced http://meta.dba.stackexchange.com/ with https://dba.meta.stackexchange.com/
Source Link
Loading
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
Source Link
Loading
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
Source Link
Loading
Source Link
Shog9 Mod
  • 454.3k
  • 203
  • 1.3k
  • 1.9k
Loading