[katzgrau]

Interesting, but in a weird way it kind of works against the whole point of Markdown - markup that emphasizes text-only readability.

I think visualizations are best left to separate projects that specialize in them - which in turn generate images that can be placed in a Markdown document.

Of course, if anyone finds this useful (obviously the author does) I would never discourage it. I'm simply trying to reconcile this with what I personally believe the main purpose of Markdown to be.

[empath75]

There's already a syntax to inline images: https://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#img

I'm not sure what the benefit of doing it this way is supposed to be.

[katzgrau]

Right, I'm basically saying the a separate service / utility would generate the image which would, in-turn, be placed in a markdown doc.

An inline image, as unnatural as it might appear in a markdown doc (as the DF post notes) is more "readable" in plain-text than what is essentially a block of YAML for configuring a chart in the middle of a document.

[IanCal]

Well, that would mean I'd need multiple source files and an ordered way of building the output. The source files would in effect just contain the same information that's here, but split up and away from their context.