Description lists with tight and loose syntax

[digitalmoksha]

What do you think about supporting the tight and loose syntax as laid out by jgm in https://github.com/jgm/commonmark-hs/blob/master/commonmark-extensions/test/definition_lists.md?

This follows the style of lists in general, where a tight list doesn't wrap the content in a paragraph, and the loose list does. So this would be valid

one
: two
: three

and generate this

<dl>
<dt>one</dt>
<dd>two
</dd>
<dd>three
</dd>
</dl>

and this would be valid

one

: two

: three

and generate this

<dl>
<dt>one</dt>
<dd>
<p>two</p>
</dd>
<dd>
<p>three</p>
</dd>
</dl>

I think what is there currently is mostly a subset of that spec. The spec adds a tight list (no blank line necessary), support for ~ as a marker, and allows for multiple definitions for each term.

[kivikakk]

SGTM — I like the idea of making the tight/loose distinction more widely used, since it's a bit obscure as it is and is often a source of confusion.

[digitalmoksha]

From my comment in #462

Waffling on this one. "Tight" and "loose" lists add complexity, and is not well understood by users. Most implementations I've seen do support the distinction. However not supporting it means styling the list would be easier and less complex. 🤷