MultiMarkdown offers a syntax for adding extended attributes to links and images. This allows the user to set width/height of images, as well as to set title text, css classes and inline styles to both images and links.
That would be extremely helpful!
I agree, I’d probably use this a ton in my art notes, to resize and float images around using CSS classes.
MultiMarkdown Composer lets you add HTML elements alongside your writing. This means you all add id="" tags to your content. And, that to me, seem very close to Roam’s UID blocks.
When I add images to my documentation, I’m able to add the alt="" tags while I write, which also saves time and helps me avoid forgetting to add them when I publish.
I so so so want Obsidian to make multimarkdown an option. If not, I have to figure out what to do about all my now broken content written in multimarkdown and markdown.
My notes are mostly in Scrivener 3, which they say is in MultiMarkdown. Would I be able to read them in Obsidian?
No, you wouldn’t.
Also, they don’t say it is in MMD. It is up to you to write markdown and export as plain text or just export rich text as Multimarkdown. Internally, Scriver uses rtf.
By the way, I also always wondered why obsidian didn’t go with MMD from the get go.
I thought MMD was superior too.
Additionally, adding MultiMarkdown would allow transparent interoperability with nvUltra and MultiMarkdown Composer. I understand that’s my own personal bias (use case?), but it seems many here like MultiMarkdown. 
After reading a separate post on blocks again, I can’t help but repeat that MultiMarkdown Composer and nvUltra allow you to write HTML directly in your document. This allows you to add the id=“lorem” on a block (word!) level, so that as you preview your document, you can click those links for precise navigation.
Perhaps that’s more a feature of those apps than MultiMarkdown? But it’s such a great idea and works so well. 
@sylvaticus when you say add “id=foo” to a word what does it look like in the file?
I’m learning about MultiMarkdown and I’m getting really into it, it has a lot of well thought out features (just the elimination of engineering bike shedding on syntax would be worth it 
) +100 on supporting MMD.
Doesn’t the original Markdown spec include using HTML? Indeed, from John Gruber:
For any markup that is not covered by Markdown’s syntax, you simply use HTML itself. There’s no need to preface it or delimit it to indicate that you’re switching from Markdown to HTML; you just use the tags.