Yes totally fine, just pointing out there’s an alternative “sort-of” way to do this built in. I don’t think Commonmark even specifies highlight as part of the standard…
That’s a very literal reading. If I was to tell you I just highlighted this text how would anyone reading even know any different? Particularly if I changed the CSS to whatever color and style I liked..
Highlighting indicates areas for attention, insertions and deletions indicate change.
Sure, we can use CSS to restyle elements, we could also for example set background-color on anything within <strong> tags, but then we would lose the ability to make things bold without also highlighting them. The plugin lets us highlight passages without losing differentiation between the styles associated with tracked changes. Being a totally optional plugin which expands upon a well-established convention I don’t see tremendous value in confusing the two.
It would be great if this followed other common Markdown highlight syntax. I’m not sure if it’s in a particular spec (a quick Google search didn’t yield anything), but popular Markdown apps with the highlight feature use double colons to enclose text, like so:
Discourse is using markdown-it for parsing markdown. I am bundling the markdown-it-mark plugin so it is available in Discourse. Support for this syntax would need to be added there.