Why does Pod::Checker deprecate section numbers in links to man pages?

And in fact, recommends not using L to anything other than another pod. This seems like a useful feature, which is supported at least in html. I've searched the archives but not found anything. Thanks in advance Karl Williamson

Re: Why does Pod::Checker deprecate section numbers in links to man pages?

Nicholas Clark wrote: On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 10:33:13PM -0600, karl williamson wrote: And in fact, recommends not using L to anything other than another pod. This seems like a useful feature, which is supported at least in html. I've searched the archives but not found anything. git blame

How can one put a table into a pod

I don't know how to put a table into a pod. One can simulate it by using as-is formatting, but it's not very good. The documentation in perlpod seems to indicate that in =begin html brFigure 1.brIMG SRC=figure1.pngbr =end html

Re: How can one put a table into a pod

On 04/23/2011 01:09 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: I don't know how to put a table into a pod. One can simulate it by using as-is formatting, but it's not very good. The documentation in perlpod seems to indicate that in =begin html brFigure 1

Re: How can one put a table into a pod

On 04/23/2011 06:23 PM, Allison Randal wrote: On 04/23/2011 03:12 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: On 04/23/2011 01:09 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: I don't know how to put a table into a pod. One can simulate it by using as-is formatting, but it's not very good. There also doesn't appear to be a way

Re: How can one put a table into a pod

On 04/23/2011 09:58 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamsonpub...@khwilliamson.com writes: It's worse than I thought. I ran some experiments. It appears that the various formatters don't recognize 'text', and so there's no way to specify a fall back. Perhaps there is a 'text' formatter. I

Re: How can one put a table into a pod

On 04/23/2011 10:13 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Apr 23, 2011, at 6:38 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: That explains how to do it. Thanks. I would like something like this for the core Perl 5 documentation. Are there reasons besides inertia for this to not be shipped with the Perl core

Re: How can one put a table into a pod

On 04/23/2011 11:53 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Apr 23, 2011, at 10:09 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: I was thinking that PseudoPod implemented most of what might be needed, and so why not ship that. Its table spec looks quite simple, and perhaps sufficient. +1 However, in thinking about

Lack of html anchor for =item * foo

I discovered that in html output of lists that have elements of the form =item * foo no a anchor is generated for foo; this is different from lists of the form =item foo The first case generates a ul list, and the second a dl list. The problem is that in the first form, any link in the file to

Re: Lack of html anchor for =item * foo

On 04/26/2011 11:02 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Apr 26, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Karl Williamson wrote: I discovered that in html output of lists that have elements of the form =item * foo noa anchor is generated for foo; this is different from lists of the form =item foo The first case

Blanks and underscores in html links

Look at http://search.cpan.org/~rjbs/perl-5.12.3/pod/perlsyn.pod There is a heading in the original source =head2 Switch statements The anchor that is generated somehow on the web is h2a class='u' href='#___top' title='click to go to top of document' name=Switch_statements_ Switch

no deprecation warning for Lsection

I was reading podspec, and saw this Previous versions of perlpod allowed for a Lsection syntax (as in LObject Attributes), which was not easily distinguishable from Lname syntax and for Lsection which was only slightly less ambiguous. This syntax is no longer in the specification, and has

Re: Lack of html anchor for =item * foo

On 04/26/2011 11:02 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: FWIW, Pod::Simple::XHTML doesn't output an ID fordts, either. The Perl core docs have roughly 700 links to dts. For example, perlfunc uses =item's for all its functions.

Re: no deprecation warning for Lsection

On 04/29/2011 04:14 AM, Michael Stevens wrote: On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 07:12:49PM -0400, Ricardo Signes wrote: * Michael Stevensmstev...@etla.org [2011-04-28T17:03:36] Has it got a victim^Wvolunteer? Yup. Marc Green (the student) and David Wheeler and I will have our first meeting to kick

Re: Pod::Html's cross referencing of C links

On 05/20/2011 03:16 PM, Ricardo Signes wrote: * Marc Greenpongu...@gmail.com [2011-05-20T16:24:21] links. More specifically, I understand how it resolves L links, but I am confused as to why you resolve C links. From reading the source, I gather that C links are resolved by searching pod

Z in =item

In perldiag.pod, there is a line like this =item Z500 Server error All the other items form a definition list. My guess is that this is to make sure that the 500 isn't mistaken for a numbered =item in the list. However, with html, anyway, I don't see any difference in the output with and

Re: Z in =item

On 06/26/2011 05:34 AM, Shawn H Corey wrote: On 11-06-25 11:53 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: In perldiag.pod, there is a line like this =item Z500 Server error All the other items form a definition list. My guess is that this is to make sure that the 500 isn't mistaken for a numbered =item

Re: GSoC Status Update

On 07/27/2011 07:58 AM, Marc Green wrote: I am happy to announce that I have made much progress on porting Pod::Checker this week. I have made a list of all the errors that Pod::Simple already checks for, and by comparing that to what Pod::Checker additionally checks

Re: Removal of specific Pod::Checker warnings

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: GSoC Status Update

On 08/23/2011 11:03 PM, Marc Green wrote: Hello everyone, This is my last status update, as GSoC ended today (Monday, at the time of writing). [I am not able to send this out now because I do not have access to my email (well, to the Internet). I am going to send it out tomorrow or the day

Deprecation of alternate text in hyperlinks

Version 1.50 of Pod::Parser adds a check and message indicating that Ltext|hyperlink is deprecated. This is based on the following sentences in perlpodspec, which has been there since its inception in 2001: Authors wanting to link to a particular (absolute) URL, must do so only with

Re: Deprecation of alternate text in hyperlinks

On 01/23/2012 10:05 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 23, 2012, at 8:06 AM, Karl Williamson wrote: The new Pod:Parser has just been installed in blead, and about 10 pods run afoul of this new check, including things like Lperl...@perl.org|mailto:perl...@perl.org My question is should

Re: On verbatim paragraphs immediately following an =item command; and Pod::Simple

On 02/18/2012 11:26 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Marc Greenpongu...@gmail.com writes: A simple (yet lengthy) question on verbatim paragraphs that immediately follow an =item command, and how Pod::Simple treats them: Given the following POD, =over =item * verbatim code snippet

Re: [rt.cpan.org #74389] Pod::Simple::Pullparser get_title should ignore X...

On 03/02/2012 12:34 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:15 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: And NAME and not NAME It should probably not just become an empty string, but it should be collapse whitespace around it, so pathological cases like: =head1 NAME Xfoo THIS Xbar TUNE Xbaz

Re: Non-ASCII data in POD

On 04/25/2012 09:25 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Grant McLeangr...@mclean.net.nz writes: My thoughts on the second issue are that we could modify Pod::Simple to 'whine' if it sees non-ASCII bytes but no =encoding. This in turn would cause Test::Pod to pick up the error and help people fix it. I

Re: Pod::Simple doesn't warn when the text of a definition =item matches /[\*\d]/; and a fix to this bug

On 01/18/2013 10:33 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 18, 2013, at 7:31 AM, Ricardo Signes perl@rjbs.manxome.org wrote: I hope we can agree that if the test results bit gets sorted out, we're in favor of this warning..? I have submitted https://github.com/theory/pod-simple/pull/44 +1.

How do I get Pod::Simple to extract pod from its containing file?

With Pod::Parser, you just do parse_from_file($in_fh, $out_fh) and it outputs the pod to $out_fh. Pod::Simple has a method of the same name which is supposed to emulate the Pod::Parser method, but when I run it, nothing is output.

Re: How do I get Pod::Simple to extract pod from its containing file?

On 01/26/2013 02:23 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com writes: With Pod::Parser, you just do parse_from_file($in_fh, $out_fh) and it outputs the pod to $out_fh. Pod::Simple has a method of the same name which is supposed to emulate the Pod::Parser

Re: How do I get Pod::Simple to extract pod from its containing file?

On 01/26/2013 07:44 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com writes: On 01/26/2013 02:23 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com writes: With Pod::Parser, you just do parse_from_file($in_fh, $out_fh) and it outputs the pod to $out_fh

Re: How do I get Pod::Simple to extract pod from its containing file?

On 01/26/2013 08:37 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: On 01/26/2013 07:44 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com writes: On 01/26/2013 02:23 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com writes: With Pod::Parser, you just do parse_from_file($in_fh

Re: Should Pod::Simple test for repeated elements in a dl

On 01/27/2013 02:47 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 26, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com wrote: I do not propose warning for something like the above. The warning would only be for repeated uses of the exact same item name, like =item - =item - =item - Oh

Re: How do I get Pod::Simple to extract pod from its containing file?

On 03/06/2013 06:15 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:52:43AM -0700, Karl Williamson wrote: On 01/26/2013 08:37 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: On 01/26/2013 07:44 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com writes: On 01/26/2013 02:23 PM, Russ Allbery wrote

Re: Is Pod::Simple::POD worth pursuing?

On 05/21/2013 08:16 PM, Ricardo Signes wrote: * John SJ Anderson geneh...@genehack.org [2013-05-21T19:33:14] * Is this a worthwhile idea? (The recent How do I get Pod::Simple to extract pod thread suggests the answer is yes.) It's hard to judge this without the context in which you're

Re: Tables in PODs

On 09/20/2013 08:43 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:30:13AM -0400, Shawn H Corey wrote: Is there any specification for tables in PODs? I haven't been able to find any. Isn't it about time tables were added? I have attached a specification for them for your review. There

Re: Existing tools for extracting POD from a source file?

On 11/28/2013 12:20 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: We've had a lot of problems lately with the fact Parrot uses Perldoc to simply extract pod statements from a generated file and emit them into another file. This stems mostly from the fact perldoc over-zealously drops privs. But the gist of it is:

Re: Assume CP1252

On 01/10/2015 11:35 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 10, 2015, at 5:48 PM, Sean Burke sbu...@cpan.org wrote: Helleu, Pod pals! Short version about Re: Assume CP1252-- I advise: yes, assume CP1252 where technically you were expecting Latin-1. Thanks for chiming in, Sean. I agree

Re: Assume CP1252

On 01/11/2015 11:01 AM, Karl Williamson wrote: On 01/10/2015 11:35 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 10, 2015, at 5:48 PM, Sean Burke sbu...@cpan.org wrote: Helleu, Pod pals! Short version about Re: Assume CP1252-- I advise: yes, assume CP1252 where technically you were expecting Latin-1

Re: Assume CP1252

On 01/12/2015 06:25 AM, Shawn H Corey wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 20:57:26 -0700 Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com wrote: To be clear, I think that assuming 1252 when there is no =encoding line is a good idea. But I'm leery of overriding an actual =encoding line. Agreed. I could

Re: Assume CP1252

On 01/12/2015 12:37 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com wrote: To be clear, I think that assuming 1252 when there is no =encoding line is a good idea. But I'm leery of overriding an actual =encoding line. Agreed. I’m okay

Re: Assume CP1252

On 01/12/2015 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com wrote: I ran across this link, but didn't see what action was taken on it: http://www.w3.org/TR/newline Pardon my ignorance. Does that mean that `s/Latin-1/CP1252/g` could

Re: Assume CP1252

On 01/12/2015 01:27 PM, Karl Williamson wrote: On 01/12/2015 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jan 12, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Karl Williamson pub...@khwilliamson.com wrote: I ran across this link, but didn't see what action was taken on it: http://www.w3.org/TR/newline Pardon my ignorance

Re: Pod::Simple can treat binary as pod due to liberal/inconsistent regexp patterns

On 01/08/2015 11:17 AM, Randy Stauner wrote: IIRC the first liberal rx is to detect start of POD just like the Perl (language) parser does, i.e. it pauses parsing for instructions until the next =cut Oh. Can someone dig into the Perl parser and confirm this? I think POD parsers

Re: Pod::Simple can treat binary as pod due to liberal/inconsistent regexp patterns

On 01/06/2015 07:55 AM, Randy Stauner wrote: This came up in discussing a metacpan bug (https://github.com/CPAN-API/cpan-api/issues/364#issuecomment-66864855)... A perl module can technically have perl code, pod, and even spans of binary (in a data token, or maybe even a here doc). To my

Re: AW: pod2usage and Pod::Find, Pod::PlainText

On 04/23/2016 03:26 PM, Marek Rouchal wrote: Thanks for the hint... two thoughts, feedback welcome: 1. Pod::PlainText used to be part of the core... but since now Pod::Usage depends on Pod::Simple, I think the tests should be restructured to use that, or as a last resort, Pod::Text Is there

pod2usage and Pod::Find, Pod::PlainText

It has been a goal to remove Pod::Parser from the core perl distribution. It turns out there is a dependency in 2 test files for pod2uage upon Pod::Find and Pod::PlainText, which are parts of Pod::Parser. The test files are Pod-Usage/t/pod/pod2usage.t and

Re: AW: Working on CPAN Testers fails for Pod::Simple::Search

On 04/24/2016 11:34 PM, Marek Rouchal wrote: Does this mean that there is a "find"-like function in Pod::Simple that replaces Pod::Find? That would be an opportunity to discontinue Pod::Find along with Pod::Parser... -Marek Looking at the man page, it looks like Pod::Simple::Search does a

Re: Pod::Simple output as POD

On 05/11/2016 07:38 PM, John SJ Anderson wrote: On May 11, 2016, at 17:52, Ron Savage wrote: On 12/05/16 10:39, David E. Wheeler wrote: Which also seems a little weird. Maybe Pod::Simple::PodFormat? Pod::Simple::ExtractPod is good, but possible is Pod::Simple::JustPod.

Re: Pod::Simple issues

On 04/29/2016 01:58 PM, Shawn H Corey wrote: On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 13:34:21 -0600 Karl Williamson <pub...@khwilliamson.com> wrote: Nested L<> are illegal. Pretending inner one is X<> so can continue looking for other errors. That would be Z<> That would genera

Re: Pod::Simple output as POD

On 05/13/2016 12:24 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On May 13, 2016, at 11:03 AM, Karl Williamson <pub...@khwilliamson.com> wrote: If we wanted to be cute, we could call it Pod::Simple::SimplyPod, with you know, only one, natural, ingredient, and no harmful additives. But is it o

Re: =item * foo bar

On 05/08/2018 09:57 PM, Dan Book wrote: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:32 PM, Karl Williamson <pub...@khwilliamson.com <mailto:pub...@khwilliamson.com>> wrote: There is code in Pod::Simple that "tolerates" (meaning accepts as a bullet item) this pod line that wou

Looking for another pod tip

I have an item text list. Not all the items have content besides the text, and so the pod would collapse them together into adjacent lines, whereas I want them separated. I did this by adding a NBSP, but then I get an extra line that I'd rather not have. Here's an example Category

Re: Pod::Simple output as POD

On 05/08/2018 07:05 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On May 8, 2018, at 18:48, John SJ Anderson wrote: I suspect the plea for counsel was more intended for David, but I’ll pipe up from the peanut gallery and say, “why not both?” It seems like the ideal thing to put under a

Interesting article: Researchers hide information in plain text

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180510150231.htm

Re: Bug #98326 for Pod-Checker: Can we make “A non-empty Z<>” a warning and not an error

On 05/22/2018 07:18 PM, Dan Muey wrote: Greetings! Per Karl Williamson’s request[1] before he makes any changes we’d like to run the idea past you all and get your feedback: http://perldoc.perl.org/perlpodspec.html says about Z<>: “This code is unusual is that it should have no content. That

What to do about L and L<"Foo Bar">

podspec says this: Previous versions of perlpod allowed for a "L" syntax (as in "L"), which was not easily distinguishable from "L" syntax and for "L<"section">" which was only slightly less ambiguous. This syntax is no longer in the specification, and has been replaced by the "L" syntax (where

Re: Bug #98326 for Pod-Checker: Can we make “A non-empty Z<>” a warning and not an error

On 05/22/2018 07:18 PM, Dan Muey wrote: Greetings! Per Karl Williamson’s request[1] before he makes any changes we’d like to run the idea past you all and get your feedback: http://perldoc.perl.org/perlpodspec.html says about Z<>: “This code is unusual is that it should have no content. That

Re: Which Pod module should be used / subclassed?

On 5/5/19 4:52 PM, Harald Jörg wrote: Hello Pod-People, I hope that I don't start a religious war with this question. I found this mailing list advertised in the Pod::Simple docs, so I would accept a bias towards Pod::Simple based solutions :) So here's what I want to do: Extract Pod from a