> (Again, rich text doesn’t need a binary file format but you ignored that)
I'm not arguing against rich text. I think it's a great idea. (My earlier comment suggests using it, actually.)
> Word’s Track Changes literally does this - you can compare/merge/etc.
Nice, but it doesn't support cherry-picking, creating and applying patch files, or any distributed VCS features. I'd also venture that it likely doesn't have anything like the 4-pane merge UI that tools like kdiff3 have.
---
If Word covers your needs, great! I'm not sure why you're arguing against markdown in favor of it, though. The two solve different problems.
I'm not arguing against word, just pointing out the practical differences between binary and plaintext files. Use what suits your particular needs!
I'm not arguing against rich text. I think it's a great idea. (My earlier comment suggests using it, actually.)
> Word’s Track Changes literally does this - you can compare/merge/etc.
Nice, but it doesn't support cherry-picking, creating and applying patch files, or any distributed VCS features. I'd also venture that it likely doesn't have anything like the 4-pane merge UI that tools like kdiff3 have.
---
If Word covers your needs, great! I'm not sure why you're arguing against markdown in favor of it, though. The two solve different problems.
I'm not arguing against word, just pointing out the practical differences between binary and plaintext files. Use what suits your particular needs!