footnotes missing from the spec
elandorr opened this issue · comments
There is no reference to footnotes in the linked specs. Is that simply missing, because it was never written, or where could we find them?
Reason being the decision to support footnotes or not. I'm trying to follow commonmark perfectly, with the GFM extensions. Can't seem to find any standard regarding footnotes, though. I don't want to deal with breaking changes in the mess of md implementations.
Cheers and thanks for having cmark-gfm out in the open. Although I suppose the license might require it. Am not a bureaucrat.
footnotes are not in the spec yet.
They work very much like shortcut reference links.
However for the link target definition the link label must start with a caret ^ and must not contain white space.
Shortcut reference links which start with a caret are resolved as footnote.
@froh Thanks for the update and the tips!
I'm sure you're aware that cmark-gfm is basically as gold a standard as CommonMark, so implementers love to see those specs 😁 😁 😁 .
It does not go un-appreciated when the GFM spec is updated, so that markdown implementors can ensure we're enabling our users to write Markdown that looks the same on GitHub as on other sites. Thanks again!