Obsidian style image links in comparison to markdown image links behave weirdly

@cgrunenberg @BLUEFROG Thanks for the clarification. Two questions:

1.) As can be seen from my example an image can be transcluded. So this is considered a bug?
2.) The problem with using a path while transcluding is probably another bug?

I would also like to voice my support for a feature request to support transclusion of images. Thanks!

Images are not supported by DEVONthink’s transclusion, the standard Markdown image syntax works fine over here (with and without a path)

Can you give an answer to my question 1:

1.) As can be seen from my example an image can be transcluded. So this is considered a bug?

Is it maybe not considered a bug, but a “happy accident”? :wink:
Regarding my question 2: Does transcluding a supported document (not an image) work using a path_ for you?

Could you send me the document and the images? Thanks!

It does as long as the path exists in the database. Did you use a path in the database or a file system path?


The document is a markdown document named test1.md and its contents are:





Here’s the Image:


There is only one image in the db with this name. And it is living at the specified location.

For me it somehow doesn’t. Is the absolute path a problem? It does work, I just had an error in my path. Sorry!

Looks fine over here using the latest internal build :slight_smile:

1 Like

:partying_face: Looking forward to it working soon!

This is the expected result, though have the image in the same group as the Markdown file as well as a copy in the Ressourcen group to make the absolute link.

Could you share a comparison site?

I found one yesterday, but it didn’t include the image syntax. It’s a PDF though. For the image syntax, I went through the websites for CommonMark et al

1 Like

This is one of the many reasons I love DT:


Obsidian does nothing of the sort. That is standard MD.

Obsidian (and others) use [[MyPage]] to create a link to MyPage (as does DT). Obsidian devs decided to extend that syntax to say if there is a ! prepended then display the item vs. create a link, borrowing from the MD syntax.

Just like [MyImage](http://myserver/MyInage.jpg) would create a link to image and ![MyImage](http://myserver/MyInage.jpg) displays it.

There isnt a standard transclusion syntax for Markdown. There is a standard image syntax which Obsidian does support because it uses CommonMark. But Obsidian lets you transclude multiple file types like images, PDFs, etc.

There isnt a standard transclusion syntax for Markdown.

We use MultiMarkdown, so yes there is a standard we employ.

MultiMarkdown is not a standard, its superset. If there is any standard its the original/CommonMark.

There is an additional resource comparing markdown implementations at Implementations · markdown/markdown.github.com Wiki · GitHub

It doesn’t have descriptions of syntax, unfortunately, but the list of parsers and implementations may be useful nonetheless.

1 Like

I believe @jasonekratz is correct: there is no true standard for Markdown syntax, and MultiMarkdown is a dialect or derivative (and mostly just one person’s idea of a direction to take). Efforts to standardize Markdown have been drawn out and controversial, and Gruber seems to dislike the current efforts (c.f. Standard Markdown Becomes Common Markdown then CommonMark).

There is an IETF RFC to standardize the media type for markdown (RFC 7763), and another titled “Guidance on Markdown: Design Philosophies, Stability Strategies, and Select Registrations (RFC 7764)” that discusses a number of Markdown variants; however, these documents are not standard specifications – they are “for informational purposes”.

The Wikipedia page for Markdown has some relatively up-to-date information on the general topic and state of affairs.

1 Like

Regardless of Gruber’s feelings on it, he essentially defined a loose standard the moment he defined his schema.
And MultiMarkdown has often been seen as a natural extension of the original spec, while honoring the core he defined.

That was a helpful post - thanks!

After some digging I found the working combination in Obsi (not sure if that is the idea one but i works on both ends).

With a recent feature in DT allowing to configure a central location for images this works like magic now in both apps.

The relative path to file setting in Obsi makes this syntax readable by DT3 but also but any other md app.

1 Like

Ah, and this plugin https://github.com/agathauy/wikilinks-to-mdlinks-obsidian solved the issue of [[wikilinks]] for internal links vs md links for images (with use [[]] disabled in Obsi).

1 Like