glittyknittykitty

There are many benefits to a standard content model. If KnitML were an adopted standard, there would be many available patterns in KnitML and many types of knitting software written to manipulate them. Imagine being able to do the following for any KnitML-based pattern:

• Render a pattern in either written directions or a chart, dependent on a preference setting
• Render a pattern in any language, using conventions familiar to that language and dialect
• Validate that a pattern is physically possible to knit (eliminating some types of errata)
• Automatically convert English measurements to and from metric measurements
• Size a pattern up or down to any size, not just the sizes that come with the pattern
• Recalculate a pattern for your gauge rather than the one that came with the pattern
• Explicitly write out mathematically complex directions (e.g., "increase 34 stitches evenly over 171 stiches")
• Alter the pattern using an easy-to-use graphical editor (or create new KnitML-based pattern from scratch)
• Preview the result of a pattern using graphics
• Integrate into your favorite knitting software (such as Sweater Wizard)
• Digitally sign the pattern to guarantee original authenticity<.li>

This would all be possible because KnitML would serve as a standard interchange format between various independently-developed software programs. Pattern designers could continue to make patterns in their current format and also provide a KnitML representation of the pattern.

KnitML was based on Laura Porter's vision to create a standard markup language for knitting patterns. She had noticed that patterns tended to be written using non-standard styles and abbreviations, so it was often difficult to convey meaning universally.