6

An edit that merly converted an inline link to a markdown link valid?

The rendered output is the same. All the edit did was make it a markdown link versus an inline link.

5
  • IMO that should have been rejected.
    – bfavaretto
    Commented Jan 24, 2013 at 0:35
  • 1
    @bfavaretto and it was...by 2/5 people.
    – Cole Tobin
    Commented Jan 24, 2013 at 0:36
  • No, it was approved. It takes 3 same-type votes to reject or approve (on Stack Overflow).
    – bfavaretto
    Commented Jan 24, 2013 at 0:38
  • @bfavaretto I know. I'm pointing to the fact that it was rejected by 2/5 votes, but the 3/5 majority won.
    – Cole Tobin
    Commented Jan 24, 2013 at 0:39
  • The user seems to specialise in editing links. However, they do seem to take the time to edit other stuff in the posts as well. Mostly. =)
    – J. Steen
    Commented Jan 24, 2013 at 8:08

1 Answer 1

9

In this case, they're not. Links on Stack Overflow already automatically get converted to a real link when rendered, so making it actual Markdown serves no purpose whatsoever. The edit should actually make some visible change. I don't understand why on Earth people would approve this (though for something like this, a rollback only adds to the clutter).

If it's not a network link that actually gets rendered as a plain link, then yes, editing it to use the title of the external page is completely appropriate.

1
  • 1
    ...appropriate, along with fixing the rest of the post, of course. Not just the link. =)
    – J. Steen
    Commented Jan 24, 2013 at 8:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .