Hacker News Reader

GitHub has incredibly high friction to get started. I don't see the antipathy toward WYSIWYG editors. It's one of the best human interface inventions we've come up with. Having to do a level of indirection about Markdown syntax is a pain, on top of remembering git commands.

View on HN

What's cool about git as a persistent storage, is that you can use vscode, emacs, vim, or notepad. Or you can write a little web app that starts a WYSIWYG editor on localhost:8888 or Heroku and have it dump to the file system and then you just need to write a script that takes care of submitting the PR from there.

This, plus there are many server-side WYSIWYG markdown editors that make it transparent to the end user that they are even using Markdown. This is really the future IMO, you get the best of both worlds. Hopefully they'll add some extensions though to Markdown. I hope the community will create even more as well.

What I'm getting at is that we're misconstruing a storage system (git), with a user-friendly interface. Ideally we get the ubiquity and interoperability of git with a WYSIWYG editor. A website that lets you edit files in the browser and is backed by a git repo could be helpful. But maybe in edge cases, it'd still be too complex. Using git here seems like overkill.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com