NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Maybe we need to nail the problem (Score:2)
It is deficient in some ways. L is just wrong. We could use a nicer way to tie in docstrings to the code. There's not enough predefined (but optional!) metadata. There's no good well-defined way to extend it if you want to go for it.
Most people, though, seem to complain that POD isn't doing what they want, when what they want isn't what POD's supposed to do. (And I know you're not in this camp, Matt)
So, anyone up for addressing POD's deficiencies in its well-defined area of applicability?
Reply to This
Re:Maybe we need to nail the problem (Score:2)
Re:Maybe we need to nail the problem (Score:1)
The way I see addressing the problem is to create a POD API (not sure if POM is the right thing - I think we'd miss a streaming API) such that we could rip out POD and replace it with XML, when we needed that sort of power (or choose markup language X). It would have to cope with some sort of extensibility mechanism like XML Namespaces, so that we could define metadata tags (I use tags in the loosest sense of the word - they could be POD formatting constructs) in a