We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
When combining strikethrough (~~) with other markup, the behavior differs depending on the nesting order.
~~
When strikethrough is nested inside, strikethrough renders correctly:
**~~a~~**b
<b>~~a~~</b>b
When strikethrough wraps other markup, no strikethrough is produced:
~~**a**~~b
~~<b>a</b>~~b
However, adding a space after makes it work:
~~**a**~~ b
~~<b>a</b>~~ b
This inconsistency seems unexpected, as the only difference is whether strikethrough is the outer or inner markup.
Would it be possible to:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
To me it is surprising that **~~a~~**b renders as ab because it doesn't work for other inline elements like **_a_**b which renders like **a**b.
**_a_**b
It seems like it should render like **a**b. The reason the underscores render like that is because of CommonMark spec's flanking rules
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
When combining strikethrough (
~~
) with other markup, the behavior differs depending on the nesting order.When strikethrough is nested inside, strikethrough renders correctly:
**~~a~~**b
renders asab<b>~~a~~</b>b
renders asabWhen strikethrough wraps other markup, no strikethrough is produced:
~~**a**~~b
renders as ~~a~~b~~<b>a</b>~~b
renders as ~~a~~bHowever, adding a space after makes it work:
~~**a**~~ b
renders asab~~<b>a</b>~~ b
renders asabThis inconsistency seems unexpected, as the only difference is whether strikethrough is the outer or inner markup.
Would it be possible to:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: