On Aug 11, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: >> "=item without any parameters is deprecated. It should either be followed by >> * to indicate an unordered list, by a number (optionally followed by a dot) >> to indicate an ordered (numbered) list or simple text for a definition >> list." > >> perlpodspec states "Pod processors must tolerate a bare "=item" as if it >> were "=item *"." Is Pod::Checker's behavior still in line with >> perlpodspec? Is the use of '=item' without any parameters deprecated? >> Or should that warning be removed from Pod::Checker? > > I'd remove it. It seems like a style thing to me, and while I personally > prefer =item *, I don't see a good reason to require that.
+1 >> Given that there is clearly a use for =itemless =over/=back blocks, >> should it still be a warning? I think no, and instead, Pod::Checker >> should warn about an empty =over/=back block, one that contains nothing >> but whitespace. > > I agree -- this one should definitely go. +1 I had no idea one could do block quotes like this. Seems a bit too overloaded, frankly (what if I want my block quote to contain a list, just nest them?), but if the spec says that's what it is, then I wouldn't warn about it. Best, David
