HTML <details> Tag

Should we support details/summary in the syntax? This is what it looks like (works best in chrome)

Example source: http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_summary.asp

Copyright 1999-2011.

- by Refsnes Data. All Rights Reserved.

All content and graphics on this web site are the property of the company Refsnes Data.

<details>
<summary>Copyright 1999-2011.</summary>
<p> - by Refsnes Data. All Rights Reserved.</p>
<p>All content and graphics on this web site are the property of the company Refsnes Data.</p>
</details>

If this is a generic extension, maybe it could look like this.
Multiline summaries could be supported by [[[ ... ]]]

!summary[ Copyright 1999-2011. ]
(((
 - by Refsnes Data. All Rights Reserved.

All content and graphics on this web site are the property of the company Refsnes Data.
)))

Or maybe there is a way to make it look neater but in core syntax.

Nice, but I’m still for:

@@@summary[ Copyright 1999-2011. ]
– by Refsnes Data. All Rights Reserved.

All content and graphics on this web site are the property of the company Refsnes Data.
@@@

Or !!! instead of @@@ if you must :wink:

lol, well I guess the real battle is in the generic directive specs. So many issues can be solved just by solving that.

Well at least we got some ideas for this.

We’ll start adding custom directives support in remarkable soon. It will be really nice if we could summarize generic syntax. Now i still see clear syntax only for “blocks”.

@vitaly Nice. The proposed custom directives syntax is in the first post of this topic.

@mb21 Problem is that it’s too “programmish”. That’s only my personal opinion. In block syntax our opinions differ only in ancor names - not a problem. But inline syntax… i don’t like it. It will be very uncommon for non-tech users.

And i don’t see feedback from jgm & other people who participate in final decisions about specs.

1 Like

@vitaly I replied in the other thread since this discussion belongs there.

Is this discussion still valid? The spec provides a way to render markdown inside of the details and summary tags. See http://spec.commonmark.org/0.27/#html-blocks.

I find the raw markdown for this syntax to be a very readable and intuitive solution:

<details><summary>Title</summary>

**Markdown content:**

 - More markdown
 - More markdown
 - More markdown
</details>
Title

Markdown content:

  • More markdown
  • More markdown
  • More markdown
1 Like

Personally, unless the syntax in question is a major improvement over HTML’s, I don’t want it.

3 Likes

How’s this?

>-> Summary
> Details
> More details

Result:

Summary

Details
More details


There’s even a reasonable-looking fallback in existing CommonMark: a block quote containing a symbolic triangle ->, followed by the summary and details.

-> Summary
Details
More details