# What could a "spoiler tag" extension look like?

**URL:** <https://talk.commonmark.org/t/what-could-a-spoiler-tag-extension-look-like/767>\
**Category:** Extensions\
**Created:** [October 6, 2014, 4:05am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/what-could-a-spoiler-tag-extension-look-like/767 "2014-10-06T04:05:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 32

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jgm](https://talk.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/jgm/32/1360_2.png) [@jgm](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/jgm)\
**Post date:** [October 29, 2014, 6:13pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/what-could-a-spoiler-tag-extension-look-like/767/32 "2014-10-29T18:13:55Z")

</div>

+++ Mb21 [Oct 29 14 13:46]:

> @jgm do you feel that the [proposed directives](http://talk.commonmark.org/t/generic-directives-plugins-syntax/444) are “overkill”?

I like the flexibility, but it looks too “codish” in my opinion. (I also worry about overusing the @ character: it is widely used now in usernames, and also in citations in pandoc markdown.)

My suggestion was motivated by the desire to have something that was more naturally readable, but offering the same flexibility.

---

_[View the full topic](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/what-could-a-spoiler-tag-extension-look-like/767)._