> > But you forget about the benefits of the source code editing, which is
> > diff and tools working with it. Surely enough big editors support their
> > own diff formats and tools, but they aren't possessed by many people. And
> > with POD everybody has a text editor :)
>
> As with XML :)
But XML tends to look like HTML which is quite noisy.
> > > Ugh... I believe SDF has better support for tables, without resorting to
> > > nastiness like that. I think if you like POD, you'll love SDF, Stas.
> > >
> > > http://www.mincom.com/mtr/sdf/
> >
> > Thanks for the link, Matt. I've seen this technology a while ago. The
> > reason that I didn't use it, is that it's a much bigger superset of syntax
> > that I need. If all I miss is a tables formatting, I'd rather add this
> > support than go for a complete format change.
>
> I wonder if it would be easy to rip the table support out of SDF and use
> that, rather than change completely to SDF. I find table support to be
> POD's only real severe weakness.
Sounds like a good idea. I don't know what's the status of POD under
perl5.6 and what are the plans. I think TomC is still in charge of this
module.
_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide http://perl.apache.org/guide
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://perl.org http://stason.org/TULARC
http://singlesheaven.com http://perlmonth.com http://sourcegarden.org
