Curious why the special `[[wiki style links]]` syntax?
E.g., why not just use Markdown's existing syntax, like `[A File](a-file.md)`?
(Cool looking project by the way, all the values are right up my alley.)
E.g., why not just use Markdown's existing syntax, like `[A File](a-file.md)`?
(Cool looking project by the way, all the values are right up my alley.)
There are 3 main reasons:
1) At least to me, "[Topic](Topic.md)" is the most typical case, where the name of the link is the same as the file name without the ".md", so I feel like not repeating the title twice is better.
Markdown supports "[](Topic.md)" but IMO the syntax doesn't look as nice.
2) Easier to distinguish between internal links and external links.
3) Personally, I think "[[note]]" blends into the sentence better.
[[wiki style links]] are not as portable as standard Markdown links, I have to admit that. We will support "[A File](a-file.md)" as well for maximum portability, and possibility provide conversion utilities if you decide to move away from the wiki style link syntax.
The vertical bar syntax is also supported, so you can write [[Topic|display name]] and "display name" will show.
I usually leave punctuation out of the link, like `[[name]]'s`.
> Also do both types of links provide the same affordances? If I write [[Topic]] vs [Topic](topic.md) is there any semantic difference?
No semantic different.
UX-wise, right now [[ auto-completes from the list of files in your folder, whereas [Topic]( doesn't.
The first time I learned about this syntax is from MediaWiki's internal link syntax [1], I wonder if there are any predecessors before them.