On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 10:52:43AM -0400, Barrie Slaymaker wrote:
> If we decide that it's Ok to mandate changes to the most common
> Pod::Parser based POD processors, I certainly don't mind providing
> some subclass of Pod::Parser or some other utility in Pod::ParseUtils.
That would be my preference. I do not want Pod::Parser to have to
know any commands other than =cut (with the sole exception of
something like =include if its ever blessed into pod).
Besides, I think there is still need for a Pod::Translator
of Pod::Compiler module that uses (or is subclassed from)
Pod::Parser to be the *real* base parser that people use (the
one that actually knows the commands, just not necessarily
the output format). I think putting =also in this new module
instead would be a much needed first step to making a much
more useful Pod2Xxxx base module that safely assumes it is
used exclusively for translating perlpod-compatible commands
into some output format (unlike Pod::Parser which simply parses
into commands and paragraphs and prase-trees without knowledge
of the meaning of them).
--
Brad Appleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.bradapp.net/
"And miles to go before I sleep." -- Robert Frost
