vnlog VS commonmark-spec

For simple analyses (i.e. what most people do most of the time) doing this on the commandline gets you there faster. I use vnlog (https://github.com/dkogan/vnlog/). By the time you fired up your editor to write your Python code, I already have analyses and plots ready.

Alternative very appropriate for some uses cases: `vnl-join` from the vnlog toolkit (https://github.com/dkogan/vnlog). Uses the `join` tool from coreutils (works well, has been around forever), and `vnlog` for nice column labelling

There's also https://github.com/dkogan/vnlog/ which is a wrapper around the existing coreutils, so all the options work, and there's nothing to learn

And to improve the ergonomics, the vnlog wrappers are available to operate on field names, while retaining the internals of the core tools:

  https://github.com/dkogan/vnlog/

I sorta, kinda agree. Tools written in AWK (and friends) are indeed somewhat unmaintainable, but they're really close to being just right for a LOT of applications. The vnlog toolkit (https://github.com/dkogan/vnlog) adds just a little bit of syntactic sugar to the usual commandline tools to make processing scripts robust and easy to read and write. This was not my intent initially, but I now do most of my data processing with the shell and vnl-wrapped awk (and sort and join, ...) It's really nice. If you write stuff in awk, you should check it out. (Disclaimer: I'm the author)

Edit: this is because GitHub uses cmark-gfm, which is a fork of cmark, which implements the CommonMark variant of markdown. Looks like CommonMark still doesn't support definition lists. :(

BookStack dev here. There's no specific "import" option but you can use the Markdown editor in BookStack and paste in your Markdown content there. The API is essentially just an endpoint to accept the same kind of data, for of course you could automate against the API for batch import. One thing to keep in mind is that BookStack markdown support is fairly tightly scoped to (commonmark + tables + tasklists), although HTML within MD is supported.

>A single canonical reference

https://commonmark.org/

Typically with major new releases of software, when the number left of the dot (e.g. 2.0) increases, it’s shipped as a separate product. Not always, but generally. The Bear folks can speak for themselves but IIRC a lot of the code was refactored / rewritten to support, for example, CommonMark. So, under the hood, it’s literally brand new in some respects.

I use Obsidian (https://obsidian.md) for a lot of things, including my RPG stuff, and there are options for exporting things as PDFs. It’s great for getting organized and doing research, but I would use other tools for long-form writing and layout. What I like about Obsidian though is that everything is done in Markdown (https://commonmark.org) and I can use Pandoc (https://pandoc.org) to transform the source to whatever I need. The caveat is that Obsidian uses a flavor of Markdown with some non-standard extensions, so a pure Markdown editor like Typora (https://typora.io) might be a better choice depending on your needs.

yes, this is the "inventor" of markdown and those rules will always work. Hugo uses something called "Commonmark" which is developed on top of the original markdown. But the original rules will always work too.

Reddit and many other sites support Markdown as an easy way to add emphasis, links, headings, etc. Markdown does not contain any keywords, as it is intended to be language-independent. However, Markdown syntax makes heavy use of square brackets [] and other characters that are difficult to type with an Ukrainian keyboard layout, e.g., the backtick `.

Check out commonmark, that is the Markdown standard supported by numerous converters including pandoc.

And if this is an exercise into that you can use a Markdown spec like CommonMark which is the spec Reddit and a variety of other sites use.