When comparing Markdown vs HyperText Markup Language (HTML), the Slant community recommends Markdown for most people. In the question“What are the best markup languages?” Markdown is ranked 2nd while HyperText Markup Language (HTML) is ranked 3rd. The most important reason people chose Markdown is:
Designed to be easy for a human to enter with a simple text editor, and easy to read in its raw form.
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 Styling via CSS
Styling through CSS is declarative and powerful, but somewhat inadequate for print without expensive tools like Prince.
Pro Natively understood by browsers
Natively understood by browsers, you can author and view HTML on virtually every computer without any additional software.
Pro Most universal and widely used markup language
Pro Simple
HTML is fairly simple for both humans and machines. It can be repetitive and burdensome to type, but less so than most other XML or SGML-derived formats.
Pro Simple interactivity through JavaScript
JavaScript code can be embedded directly into a HTML document.
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.
Con Verbose
Tags can hide actual content.
