# Consistent attribute syntax

**URL:** <https://talk.commonmark.org/t/consistent-attribute-syntax/272>\
**Category:** Extensions\
**Created:** [September 4, 2014, 10:28am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/consistent-attribute-syntax/272 "2014-09-04T10:28:34Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 130

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jgm](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/jgm/32/1360_2.png) [@jgm](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/jgm)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2019, 5:45pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/consistent-attribute-syntax/272/130 "2019-04-23T17:45:51Z")

</div>

> I wonder what is the advantage of putting the attribute block after the block? I would personally follow “Beyond Markdown” recommendation and put them _before_ the block and for inline I would leave them _after_

The main reason for this recommendation is to avoid ambiguities. If block attributes can come after a block, then there’s always an ambiguity about whether the attribute goes with the block or the final inline in it.

> > [@cabo](#):
> >
> > For the record, I believe that completely hijacking essentially any use of ASCII braces for the attribute syntax is misguided. Maruku/kramdown had it right by requiring the colon; that is a combination much less likely to occur in running text. Markdown should err on the side of keeping simple things simple, and having to escape any brace is not simple.
> 
> I completely agree. Escaping left curly brackets could be quite problematic.

Where do curly brackets appear in ordinary text? Of course they appear in computer code, but that should be in code backticks. They also appear in math, but that too should be in a special environment (since a lot of mathematical expressions would otherwise need escaping).

Chicago Manual of Style only mentions these two uses:

---

_[View the full topic](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/consistent-attribute-syntax/272)._