17

The best solution is to escape the underscore with the backslash. Using a backslash forces the following character to be used literally rather than as part of Markdown formatting: \_\_\_\_\_\_ ______ You could also use code formatting (with backticks), which is always literal, but that also adds a grey background which may not be universally liked. ______ ...


13

EDIT: Replaced incorrect samples at bottom with true ones showing the difference between faked small caps and real ones, and made all images clickable for enlargement. In The Elements of Typographical Style, Robert Bringhurst writes: Genuine small caps are not simply shrunken versions of the full caps. They differ from large caps in stroke weight, ...


10

Why the [expletive deleted] would anyone think that removing the different background color from blockquotes is in any way, shape, or form a good idea? Just because everyone else is jumping off a cliff doesn't mean we should, too. Don't tell me "because theming", because any theme worth the name will have a contrast background color available. Grrr.


10

The only possible correct answer for a site policy is option 5: let the poster decide, and leave it the [expletive deleted] alone. Edit wars like in the linked example are laughable. It's an ellipsis in an internet post, folks, not a government ID number on a tax return. If you encounter a post where someone used regular spaces between the periods and it's ...


9

Generally speaking we should start with trying to reduce the amount of newly created posts with that kind of markup by creating awareness for the style that we do want to have on ELU. I am pretty sure there are no statistics about how many people type the backticks and how many use the according button ({}), but the latter one is a WMD button. The ...


8

I am strongly against this for one reason only: it encourages and validates the misuse of backticks. On the rest of the network, as it is we already have quite enough trouble training users (particularly those from certain places of the world) not to use backticks for emphasis. The last thing we need is a site literally saying "your backticks will be ...


8

The system is interpreting <v> as an HTML tag, and therefore it's not shown. Not all HTML tags are supported, but e.g. <b>, to make things bold, works: <b>test</b> produces test Notice that the tags seem to have gone here as well, but in this case they do have an effect. For a list of supported tags, see What HTML tags are allowed on ...


7

Underlining is not supported in user posts. One reason is that underlining in web pages is customarily used for links, and your text would [probably] not be a link. The other reason is that the designers don't like it: underlining isn't used in any Stack Exchange site, as far as I am aware — even for links. Normally, it's acceptable to find some ...


6

If adding a small-caps option to EL&U is technologically feasible and straightforward, I would love to have the option to use them. As matters stand, when I quote definitions from old (and some new) dictionaries, I generally replace small-and-large-cap words with all-cap equivalents; but the closer my retyped versions are to the originals, the better I ...


6

I'm also against changing how backticks are displayed. I use them deliberately for their effect and never use them for italics. The formatting is visible 'live' beneath the editing window on the standard site, and it's certainly visible after posting even if accessing the site from a phone. Whatever people use for formatting, the effect of the formatting is ...


6

TL;DR Yes. Use the <sub>…</sub> tags. For example: In the series x1, x2, x3, ⋯ xn, we see … There are corresponding <sup>…</sup> tags. And for certain, specialized uses, there are specific Unicode characters you might find useful¹. ¹ Such as the superscript numerals More Formatting Options I have yet to find one source ...


6

You can do it with regular HTML notation in accordance with the following coding: <sup>1</sup> When you use this code in your post, it produces a 1 that looks like this: 1


5

Yes, for consistency, these numbers should also use thousands separators. As the main SE language is English, even for sites about other languages such Russian, then a comma should be used as the separator. Other parts also use thousands separators, like stats, so tags should do so too. Here's some stats from Russian Language Stack Exchange:


5

As mentioned in the Editing Help, you can use two spaces after each line: > This is one line > This is the next line > This line contains *italics* and **bold** produces This is one line This is the next line This line contains italics and bold Alternatively, you can put an HTML line break (<br/>) after each line, but that's more ...


5

Personally I could live with any of 1,2 or (preferably) 5. Expecting people to use symbols that are not easily available on all keyboards and setups seems unnecessarily complex and, which is more, will simply be ignored by the vast majority of users. If I had to choose, I would go for 5. While I appreciate correct punctuation as much as anyone and will be ...


4

There are cases where back ticks are quite useful. For instance, when telling someone what Google argument to use it's much clearer to say synonym pope than "synonym pope" (should the user include the quotes or not?) or synonym pope. And recently I wanted to discuss [sic], and any other sort of "quoting" would have been confusing. Yeah, I suppose there is ...


4

I’m delighted you asked... ...but as I am unclear on the clusivity of we, I shall answer not in the semantically ambiguous first person plural but in the far more concrete first person singular, explaining what I myself do. I merely run whatever lowercased text string through the following one-to-one transliteration set via a simple little ᴄʟɪ tool written ...


4

Markdown supports a limited subset of HTML. Superscript and subscript tags are included: Text <sup>up</sup> Text <sub>down</sub> Text up Text down Some fonts come with a full or nearly-full set of superscript and subscript glyphs. Georgia Pro, the font used here, doesn't; but it does come with numbers which you can enter using ...


4

We do ask for context. I have done so hundreds of times, and I'm far from the most productive reviewer. I've decided it's a waste of time. Perhaps one in fifty new posters ever even replies to my comments, perhaps one in a hundred makes the suggested improvements. It's much more productive simply to track down the source and insert it my own damn self, and ...


3

This is a feature. Whenever you visit a link, your browser remembers it. Then, if a website is programmed a specific way, a link you visited will be a different color than a link you didn't visit. (See here for more explanation.) You can see this here by clicking on only one of these links: Link 1 | Link 2 If you clear your browser history the links will ...


3

It's possible to get a REASONABLE APPROXIMATION of small caps by enclosing a string of capitals in both <sub> and <sup> (in that order). As you see, the baselines don't line up exactly, although the size is quite a good match for the x-height of normal text. True small caps should be slightly wider than a simple optical reduction, though. <...


3

I can understand your desire for more information. I'm sure there are a lot of things I'm overlooking in this answer. However... no one is forced to answer a question they feel is inadequate. If you think a question is deficient, you have a number of options: Comment (if they don't respond, you tried) Google the sentence for a source Down vote (with or ...


3

Unfortunately, typography and ease of use are at odds here, plus different style guides and typographers disagree about the details. The one thing that nearly everyone agrees on is that there should be some extra space between the dots, and it should never break across lines. The exact amount of space varies according to context and taste, but NARROW NO-...


3

Most of our formatting is simply de facto convention, reflecting the preferences of longstanding members who edit and post frequently. While there was some early attention to formatting standards, e.g. Path for adopting EL&U formatting standards Style guide for questions, answers, and comments nothing like a formal style guide has come to fruition. ...


3

The gray box produced by <code> tags / backticks might even be turned into an advantage: "Having children of my own <code>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</code> me" "Having children of my own             me" or, perhaps more simply: "Having children of my own `...........`...


3

I came here through your comment on my question, and couldn't leave without my 5 cents: Modern HTML tries to more and more separate structure/semantics from styling, and Markdown as a lighter way to write a subset of HTML even more so. It is for this reason that in HTML one should use <em>x</em> and <strong>x</strong> (emphasis and ...


2

The advice I gave Chris, and that I think ought to be adopted, is that if the style question involves (for instance) punctuation or grammatical preferences espoused by specific style guides, we ought to take them here. For things like citation formats, send them to Writers. I haven't had the opportunity to talk this over with the Writers mods yet though. I'...


2

I really wish people would read this posting — which I hereunder quote in full. This is in Bringhurst. To quote from the other posting’s citation, since nobody else seems to think this is a duplicate but me, I point out that in his highly recommended Elements of Typographical Style, Robert Bringhurst writes on page 82 of version 3.2 of that book: Most ...


2

I've had cause to use backticks on ELU from time to time. Not very often, because it's not a common need on ELU, but it has come up. I'd rather that ability wasn't taken away. It would also encourage people to misuse backticks on stackexchange as a whole.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible