Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-12 Thread Karl Williamson
On 08/11/2011 12:54 PM, Ricardo Signes wrote: * Marc Greenpongu...@gmail.com [2011-08-11T06:40:17] 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

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-12 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 12, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Karl Williamson wrote: I agree with this that there shouldn't be a warning if there are things within the =over/=back that aren't =item's. I'm not sure about if there is only white space. I could be persuaded it is a useful warning, which Marc was originally

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-11 Thread Marc Green
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Shawn H Corey shawnhco...@gmail.comwrote: On 11/08/11 10:37 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: Marc Greenpongu...@gmail.com writes: Pod::Checker currently warns if there is an '=item' directive with no argument (as opposed to '=item *', for example). The

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-11 Thread David E. Wheeler
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

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-11 Thread Shawn H Corey
On 11/08/11 11:45 AM, Marc Green wrote: I agree that a POD checker should report *all* errors/warnings, but is having an argumentless =item really a warning? By Pod::Checker's defintion, a warning indicates bad style, so that would mean that having an argumentless =item is bad style.

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-11 Thread Shawn H Corey
On 11/08/11 12:17 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: what if I want my block quote to contain a list, just nest them? Yup. -- Just my 0.0002 million dollars worth, Shawn Confusion is the first step of understanding. Programming is as much about organization and communication as it is about

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-11 Thread Ronald J Kimball
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:19:45PM -0400, Shawn H Corey wrote: You're correct. Under Pod Commands, =item is listed as a bare item. I don't know why there is a note for being forgiving for a valid structure, but it's confusing. And, of course, if it's valid, it can't be bad style. What?

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

2011-08-11 Thread Ricardo Signes
* Marc Green pongu...@gmail.com [2011-08-11T06:40:17] 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