When comparing Markdown vs Strapi, the Slant community recommends Strapi for most people. In the question“What is the best Node.js-based CMS?” Strapi is ranked 4th while Markdown is ranked 10th. The most important reason people chose Strapi is:
Strapi comes with blueprints that let you create, read, update and delete your data. You also can paginate, sort and filter your results in a matter of seconds with simple but yet specific parameters.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Human-readable
Designed to be easy for a human to enter with a simple text editor, and easy to read in its raw form.
Pro Widely used
Markdown is quickly becoming the writing standard for academics, scientists, writers, and many more. Websites like GitHub and reddit use Markdown to style their comments.
Pro De facto standard
Markdown is ubiquitous. It's supported by nearly everything. The markup available in the common subset of all the many dialects isn't that rich, but it's usually enough to get the job done.
Pro Multi-directional
You can convert HTML to Markdown or Markdown to HTML. You can use tools like pandoc to convert to other formats as well.
Pro Revision friendly
It is easy to track changes for markdown documents as compared to other formats like doc, html, etc. You only need to place your markdown documents under some version control system.
Pro Auto-generate REST APIs
Strapi comes with blueprints that let you create, read, update and delete your data. You also can paginate, sort and filter your results in a matter of seconds with simple but yet specific parameters.
Pro Users, groups and permissions
Manage user settings, login, registration, groups and permissions on the fly. Strapi delivers all those essential features out-of-the-box.
Pro Out-of-the-box administration panel
Easy way to manage your application. This panel allows you to add/edit/delete entries for your APIs, manage your users, groups and permissions. In the future, it will be such as WordPress-like administration panel dedicated to your application.
Cons
Con Lacks a coherent standard
Lacks a coherent standard, just many semi-compatible dialects (MultiMarkdown, etc). This inconsistency can cause problems if the person writing the Markdown is using a different dialect from the one that will be used to render it.
Con Bad support for table
It has poor support for table, while table is an important part of article.
Con Bad support for larger documents
Works good for single file documents like READMEs.
Lack support for cross-references, TOCs, document index etc.
Con It doesn't support semantic markup
It's unstructured.