# An interesting idea - markdown specification with RGB based support

**URL:** <https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124>\
**Category:** Extensions\
**Tags:** release-1.0\
**Created:** [April 16, 2022, 1:50am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124 "2022-04-16T01:50:20Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 8\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anon20778841](https://cdn.commonmark.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v2/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon20778841](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/anon20778841)\
**Post date:** [April 16, 2022, 1:50am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/1 "2022-04-16T01:50:20Z")

</div>

Hi Community Commonmark.

#### Feature name

Markdown specification with todo support RGB(red, green, blue)

#### Feature description

I recently had this idea - adding todo [RGB](https://www.w3schools.com/colors/colors_rgb.asp) support in Markdown, I don’t know if it’s a good idea and I wanted to know everyone’s opinion.

#### Idea, Example, Image:

 ![image](https://cdn.commonmark.org/uploads/default/original/2X/a/adee058bc43dbae194adba397fdd8d4cf17c814d.png)

#### Idea, source-code:

```markdown
[x:r] pop
[x:b] rock
[x:g] blues
[x] metal
[x] jazz
[x] classical
[] pop-rock

```

#### html

```auto
<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox221" checked="true">
<label for="checkbox221" style="color: red;">pop</label>

<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox222" checked="true">
<label for="checkbox222" style="color: blue;">rock</label>

<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox223" checked="true">
<label for="checkbox223" style="color: green;">blues</label>

<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox224" checked="true">
<label for="checkbox224">metal</label>

<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox225" checked="true">
<label for="checkbox225">jazz</label>

<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox226" checked="true">
<label for="checkbox226">classical</label>

<input type="checkbox" id="checkbox227">
<label for="checkbox227">pop rock</label>

```

#### Notes/References

1. x:r is checked with color red.
2. x:b is checked with color blue.
3. x:g is checked with color green.
4. Inspiration RGB(red, green, blue).
5. none is unchecked.
6. This is just an example of an idea, , I wanted to know everyone’s opinion here.
7. If this idea was bad, I apologize for the inconvenience.
8. [dillinger - markdown editor online](https://dillinger.io/)
9. symbol ‘:’ means ‘with’

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Crissov](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/crissov/32/1455_2.png) [@Crissov](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/Crissov)\
**Post date:** [April 16, 2022, 8:36am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/2 "2022-04-16T08:36:18Z")

</div>

It is a bad idea indeed, not least due to English language abbreviations which are not something MD uses.

However, I see the point in having more states for checkboxes, but this could be done with different language neutral symbols, e.g. `[/]`, `[+]`, `[-]`, `[_]`.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anon20778841](https://cdn.commonmark.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v2/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon20778841](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/anon20778841)\
**Post date:** [April 16, 2022, 6:53pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/3 "2022-04-16T18:53:59Z")

</div>

This is good: `[/], [+], [-], [_].` - great idea. So… there is an unknown markdown dialect called [.bullet](https://github.com/cameronblandford/.bullet)

#### file `.bullet`

```auto
- [] Todo
- [x] Finished todo
- [>] Migrated from daily log to new monthly log
- [<] Migrated to appropriate month in future log
- [~] Not worth doing
- note
* event
- [[]] Important todo

```

My idea would be to specify markdown with bullet and with your idea:

#### example

```auto
- [] Todo
- [x] Finished todo
- [>] Migrated from daily log to new monthly log
- [<] Migrated to appropriate month in future log
- [~] Not worth doing
- note
* event
- [[]] Important todo
- [/]
- [+]
- [-]
- [_]

```

### Notes

1. Keywords: `event`, `note`
2. I don’t know if it’s interesting, but it’s a vision I had today

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anon20778841](https://cdn.commonmark.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v2/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon20778841](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/anon20778841)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2022, 1:28pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/4 "2022-04-18T13:28:35Z")

</div>

@Crissov We could create a commonmark-todo? What do you think of the idea?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anon20778841](https://cdn.commonmark.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v2/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon20778841](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/anon20778841)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2022, 4:24am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/5 "2022-04-27T04:24:28Z")

</div>

What do you think of the idea commonmark-todo? @vas

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![vas](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/vas/32/1267_2.png) [@vas](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/vas)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2022, 3:28pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/7 "2022-04-27T15:28:40Z")

</div>

> [@anon20778841](#):
>
> What do you think of the idea commonmark-todo? @vas

There might be some demand for a TODO list with more states. I don’t know.

To be blunt, it’s not going to become part of the CommonMark spec, as there are very many high demand extensions that have been waiting for years to be added. They haven’t been added because the CommonMark spec has been focused only on solidifying a specification for “core” or “basic” Markdown, i.e. the original Markdown defined by Gruber.

But this solid core is a good base upon which to add extensions. That’s what Pandoc, GitHub and many others do.

If you want to pursue your idea, you can implement it as an extension to one of the CommonMark implementations that supports extensions, e.g. Markdown-it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anon20778841](https://cdn.commonmark.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v2/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@anon20778841](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/anon20778841)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2022, 9:06pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/8 "2022-04-27T21:06:29Z")

</div>

@vas So… I know at least these 9 to-do list formats:

- [todoflow](https://github.com/bevesce/TodoFlow)
- [todo standard](https://github.com/todo-md/todo-md)
- [plaintasks](https://github.com/aziz/PlainTasks)
- [foam todo](https://foambubble.github.io/foam/dev/todo.html)
- [plaintodo](https://github.com/ota42y/plaintodo)
- [.bullet todo](https://github.com/fulgor/bulletjournal.md)
- [dendron todo](https://handbook.dendron.so/notes/0292b34e-47eb-4499-8f49-d9891accdb3d/)
- [todo-txt-format](https://github.com/dertuxmalwieder/SublimeTodoTxt)
- [todo todoist](https://github.com/hi5/todo-pt)

1. All these task formats that i am aware of are markdown based
2. I was wondering if I could not standardize all these formats as commonmark-todo
3. I was thinking of creating something like Babelmark-todo

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Crissov](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/crissov/32/1455_2.png) [@Crissov](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/Crissov)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2022, 6:41am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/an-interesting-idea-markdown-specification-with-rgb-based-support/4124/9 "2022-04-28T06:41:22Z")

</div>

It’s certainly a good idea to document commonalities, (compatible) extensions and (incompatible) differences. You can then specify a CM extension from that, which should include test cases even for corner cases.