# Tables in pure Markdown

**URL:** <https://talk.commonmark.org/t/tables-in-pure-markdown/81>\
**Category:** Extensions\
**Created:** [September 3, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/tables-in-pure-markdown/81 "2014-09-03T20:48:29Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 107

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jkdev](https://cdn.commonmark.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v2/letter/j/e79b87/32.png) [@jkdev](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/jkdev)\
**Post date:** [September 16, 2016, 2:17am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/tables-in-pure-markdown/81/107 "2016-09-16T02:17:58Z")

</div>

> [@jaime-olivares](#):
>
> Just landing on this website. I read that 2 years ago, the table spec was relegated as not considered part of the ‘core features’. After two years, I don’t see a clear intention of incorporating tables into the core.

Welcome to the site!

I think the main reason tables are included in extensions, rather than in the CommonMark core, is that the [original Markdown syntax by John Gruber](https://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax) did not include tables at all. Many other flavors and implementations of Markdown don’t include tables either, not even [basic ones with pipes and hyphens](http://johnmacfarlane.net/babelmark2/?normalize=1&text=%7C+Header++%7C+Another+header+%7C%0A%7C---------%7C----------------%7C%0A%7C+field+1+%7C+something++++++%7C%0A%7C+field+2+%7C+something+else+%7C).

> [@jaime-olivares](#):
>
> I think it is time for you guys to take the common denominator of the major players and write down a basic proposal for tables. I guess that would be pipes and hyphens.

There’s something to that. I suggested something similar as a [mostly-least-common-denominator approach](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/tables-vs-fenced-code-blocks-when-is-something-common/411/8). On the other hand, I would worry about trying to impose any sort of table standard where none exists.

CommonMark isn’t quite a “standards committee,” it’s really just [yet another Markdown flavor](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/call-it-yamf-leaven-the-brand-sell-it-on-its-merits-not-its-name/410), but even so I feel our main goal is to specify rather than to innovate. Given the huge variety of table syntaxes and potential conflicts, it might better to step back and let the major players fight it out as the de-facto-standardization process runs its course.

---

_[View the full topic](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/tables-in-pure-markdown/81)._