[spec] Possible Tables Syntax

[Philip Linde]

On Sat, 02 Jan 2021 22:35:36 +0100
nothien at uber.space wrote:

> What do you think?

I think that using preformatted blocks as an extension vector for table
data is a bad idea. Preformatted then no longer always means
preformatted.

I also have qualms about the suggested format itself because there are
already formats for describing tabular data with a lot of tooling
support. If the goal is machine readability, choose a format which is
already supported by numerous software.

In particular I think it's a bad idea to introduce something like this
as an optional recommended best practice. Either go all in, or what
looks like a table in one client will look nothing like a table in
another.

My suggested solution: if you really need an in-line human readable
table, lay it out in a preformatted block such that it makes sense to a
user with a client that interprets and displays preformatted blocks as
preformatted blocks. If you need the same data to be available machine
readable, link to a corresponding CSV/TSV/*SV below.

-- 
Philip
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailing-list-archive.gemi.dev/www/attachments/20210103/43555c13/attachment.sig>