[garbageoverflow]

If it were a WYSIWYG editor, there'd be previews for images. But it seems like it's just syntax highlighting for textareas. Nice project either way, but false advertising.

[ricardobeat]

Indeed it is a misuse of the term. An actual WYSIWYG editor would not show any of the formatting markers.

By definition a “Markdown editor” cannot be WYSIWYG - you can have a WYSIWYG editor that is powered by markdown underneath though, which this is not.

[calmworm]

I didn’t see an option for images. Am I missing something?

[macintux]

I assume that was the point. The parent commenter feels "WYSIWYG" by definition includes images.

[WA]

I can type text, mark it, click "B" for bold and it works. This is WYSIWYG minus images.

[clippyplz]

WYSIWYG does not refer to the icons in the toolbar, but rather the text itself. This is not WYSIWYG because when I make something bold, I see a bunch of asterisks around it.

Still a cool project, but someone who does not understand markdown would wonder why pressing the heading button makes my text into a hashtag instead of making it bigger.

[eviks]

You see _ text _, but instead of 2 underscores you get formatted text. That's a definitional violation of WYSIWYG editing style