Bug or missing feature? I often use HTML comment markers in files, and just above every markdown app respects these when exporting, and strips them and what’s between them. Lettera includes them on export.
Do you also expect HTML comments to disappear in HTML export?
If they remain in the HTML, it’s not a big deal, since they won’t be visible. So you might want comments in HTML because you’re commenting the HTML for the future. But in ePub or PDF, I would expect them to not be visible.
1 Like
Actually the usual markdown syntax with “%%” for comments (Obsidian, Ulysses …) and grey out appearance in editor would be ideal. Is there no common mark extension for them?
Standard markdown comments use HTML comment syntax (to the extent that there is a standard):
Yes sure, but not very comfortable for users who don’t want to write special html-syntax. I already tried the html-syntax but refused to use it because it would be exported as you mentioned. I came up with my own solution. However, the percent sign syntax is more convenient, it leads to better compatibility and to a more meaningful appearance in editor by displaying the comment greyed out.
That may work in Bear, but markdown documents are meant to be compatible across apps. Obsidian’s approach is also non-standard.
Comments weren’t in the initial markdown spec. They are in CommonMark, which is an attempt to codify much of what was missing. But like some of the non-core markdown code, different editors don’t always treat things the same.
There is a standard and there is a defacto standard. When many apps use “%%” for comments then this becomes the real standard. In the current Panda editor there are many markups (table and footnotes as far as I know) which are not standard in the official document