Generated source
## Release notes
1. Review the [migration](https://example.com/migration)
2. Confirm the table
| Area | State |
| --- | --- |
| Links | Ready |
```sh
npm run check
```Conversion review guide
Review generated Markdown in three passes
First check document meaning, then inspect Markdown syntax, then test the renderer that will publish it. This catches more than comparing the output character by character with the source HTML.
The goal is equivalent meaning, not identical markup
HTML and Markdown have different expressive power. A useful conversion preserves the hierarchy, sequence, labels, destinations, code, and essential table meaning while making unavoidable simplifications visible enough to review.
The three review passes
- Meaning and structure.Read the preview as a document. Check heading hierarchy, paragraph order, lists, quotes, tables, and missing sections.
- Markdown source.Inspect delimiters, escaping, blank lines, indentation, code fences, links, pipes, and any retained raw HTML.
- Destination rendering.Open the Markdown in GitHub, the documentation site, CMS, or knowledge tool that will actually publish it.
Structure-by-structure checklist
| Structure | Check | Typical failure |
|---|---|---|
| Headings | One logical hierarchy without skipped or duplicated levels | Styled paragraphs mistaken for headings |
| Lists | Order, nesting, continuation paragraphs, and task state | Nested items flattened or numbering restarted |
| Links | Visible label, URL, title, and escaping | Unsafe or malformed source changes the Markdown boundary |
| Tables | Header, row/column count, pipes, alignment, and lost spans | Complex HTML forced into a simple pipe grid |
| Code | Inline vs block intent, fence length, language hint, and whitespace | Backticks or indentation close the block early |
| Images | Alt text, reference, trust, and destination availability | Remote URL preserved but asset unavailable or unsafe to fetch |
| Raw HTML | Destination support and security policy | Renderer escapes or strips the retained element |
Review a representative fixture
Questions to ask
- Was “Release notes” really a level-two heading?
- Does the URL point to the intended page?
- Did every source row survive?
- Is
shthe right code language? - Does the destination support this table?
Turn real failures into lasting evidence
Keep the smallest de-identified source that reproduces a problem, the expected Markdown, and the expected preview behavior. A regression fixture is more valuable than an informal note because it protects future conversions.
Remove personal, confidential, proprietary, and account-specific content before keeping or sharing a fixture.
Conversion-review FAQ
Is MD Studio's preview enough?
It is useful, but no. The final destination may use a different Markdown parser, extensions, sanitization policy, link policy, or CSS.
Should I compare every character with the HTML?
Usually not. Compare meaning and structure first, then inspect syntax where the source was complex or security-sensitive.
What should become a bug report?
A reproducible case where supported source meaning is lost, unsafe Markdown is generated, sanitized output becomes active, or the UI reports success despite a failed operation.
Review in the same order your reader experiences it
Meaning first, source second, destination last.
Open MD Studio