It's a step in the right direction, but in my humble opinion is light on [courage|C2:XpCourageValue].

I think "{{{bold and italics should //be}}}" should be "{{{bold and italics should //be \\}}}". Otherwise, how is that line break supposed to get in there?

Is there any compelling reason to allow {{{\\}}} in the middle of a line, rather than requiring it to be at the end?

I don't think that a source linebreak in a list item should force a new paragraph - that defeats the ability to edit in a normal text editor without long lines.

It felt to me like we had broad consensus to require whitespace after bullets.

Also, some time soon, we need to take a hard, critical look at the incompatibilities with the current [Crossmark] draft spec.

-- RaphLevien 2007-01-10

The bold and italics markers are fine as they are right now as far as I'm concerned. Using \\ to force a linebreak is fine, but I would require it to be on the end of the line. Is it the intention that normal ENTERs should be ignored entirely?

To require users to put a space behind a bullet feels a little restricting. Also, it wouldn't be necessary if you only allow "**" to be recognized as a 2nd level list item if the list was already started.

I'd like a clarification on the use of the <<>> placeholder for "something advanced". Does this mean we could use the placeholder for macros or plugins? If so, a way to deal with parameters would be nice. Something like {{{<<plugin|parm1|parm2>>}}} or
{{{
<<plugin>>
parm1 
parm2
<<plugin>>
}}}
--MartijnVanDerKleijn, 10 jan 2007

I think the only compelling reason to allow line breaks in the middle of a line are for tables.  Hmmm, I guess I should explicitly add that line breaks are allowed in tables.

-- [ChuckSmith], 2007-Jan-11