I do understand that; it’s just Markdown. My concern is that without a certain minimum of functionality that the rank and file have come to expect from collaborative text editing tools, they will reject Fibery as an acceptable replacement for Google Docs (or whatever they’re used to).
Some of my not-very-technically-savvy users are going to shake their heads incredulously at “missing standard formatting capabilities” like underline and foreground color – just because they are used to them, and they see no reason to “go backward” by switching to a tool that does not support such “basic” features that they have come to value and expect.
For FIbery to be a viable product for me (and I know my position is not unique), I need to be able to convince an entire team of such people that migrating from Google Docs & Sheets to Fibery will be a step forward, including for simple needs like authoring Meeting Notes and webpage content documents.
These folks will not understand the more abstract benefits of such a migration, and they will be convinced (or not) largely by Fibery’s perceived usability and utility. For them, pedestrian features like underlining will augment their perception of Fibery’s utility and maturity – and its absence will have the opposite effect.
And honestly I don’t think that we users should be expected to give up industry-standard rich text formatting capabilities, just because an esoteric committee of PhD’s has decided that underlining is more decorative than semantic, or too easily confused with hyperlinks, or some such bull💩.
Underlining support is already there in the editor – just missing a toolbar button and shortcut. Ditto for strikethrough. Just because you never use it doesn’t mean millions of others don’t find it super-useful, and they will resent its removal from the repertoire of tools available for their self expression. Clearly I do, right? 