> I think it's time Markdown should be supported natively by browsers.
I'd rather have AsciiDoc become the default lightweight documentation format. Markdown suffers from competing standards regarding extensibility beyond basic formating, whereas AsciiDoc is a quite direct translation of the solid standard Docbook.
Extending Markdown to anything more complex than bold, italic or headers requires deciding among a number of competing tools with different syntax and installing them as extensions. AsciiDoc has features as tables, references, images or metadata integrated in the standard, and it has been designed for extensibility, while Markdown was not.
There is an advantage of using Markdown over AsciiDoc, which is that it is currently supported by a larger variety of tools. But that advantage is somewhat negated by its different and slightly incompatible flavors.
Does AsciiDoc have a nice way to ignore all LaTeX code enclosed within $...$ (inline math), $$...$$ (displayed math), \(...\) (inline math), and \[...\] (displayed math)?
I think one of the problems of Markdown is that it does not provide a way for the Markdown parser to ignore any text within certain delimiters (I especially care about ignoring text within Latex math delimiters). This is the most crucial reason why I am using tools like TexMe or Markdeep.
Is AsciiDoc better in this area? If yes, it would definitely solve a big problem for me that Markdown does not solve.
AFAIK there are several ways to embed LaTeX and mathematical formulas in AsciiDoc such as asciidoctor-latex [1] or ASCIIMathML and LaTeXMathML [2].
AsciiDoc also allows embedding literal paragraphs or blocks of text [3]. I think the mechanism of passthrough macros [4] can be used to copy raw text to the output and allow further processing down the pipeline, though I'm not sure how it's used.
I'd rather have AsciiDoc become the default lightweight documentation format. Markdown suffers from competing standards regarding extensibility beyond basic formating, whereas AsciiDoc is a quite direct translation of the solid standard Docbook.
Extending Markdown to anything more complex than bold, italic or headers requires deciding among a number of competing tools with different syntax and installing them as extensions. AsciiDoc has features as tables, references, images or metadata integrated in the standard, and it has been designed for extensibility, while Markdown was not.
There is an advantage of using Markdown over AsciiDoc, which is that it is currently supported by a larger variety of tools. But that advantage is somewhat negated by its different and slightly incompatible flavors.
https://asciidoctor.org/docs/asciidoc-vs-markdown/
https://www.ericholscher.com/blog/2016/mar/15/dont-use-markd...