At 16:52 2002-04-08 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote: >Since this discussion always had the same end: NO to L<text|uri>, I came >with a new sequence, to circumvent the broken record experience. Unless >you have a technical argument against adding this new sequence lets put it >in, adjust the parsers, converters and move on spending our time on other >productive things.
Limiting my objections to only technical considerations? You sweet-talker you! How's this: currently, I _technical_ly _consider_ that new formatting codes should be added only when necessary. The fact that you ran into trouble when trying to use Pod to write a book does not constitute necessity, especially since perlpod says (said? I think I left it in) something to the effect of "no-one's saying this is enough of a language for writing a book!". But lo, I wrote a whole book in Pod and didn't feel the need for this even once. That being said, that doesn't mean that a U<...> would be a /bad/ idea. I'm a bit unhappy with bringing the number of |-using entities from a horrid one to a doubly-horrid two, so I wonder whether a different syntax might be better. But the basic idea, I'm still thinking about. Thought, I should point out, is something that usually happens /off list/ -- a lesson I learned from p5p. I have been thinking about your proposal, and will continue to think about it. When my book is out of tech edit (presumably by the middle of next month), the first thing I'll do is try to get out the new Pod parser class, which I've had on hold for far too long. As I make it conform to perlpodspec, I will consider whether it's a good time to drop in something like U<>. Then I will destroy, incinerate, annihilate, and otherwise stomp on the current Pod::Html abomination, and replace it with something using my new Pod parser system. So, if I am not displaying enough of a cold-sweat panic to rush U<> into perlpodspec and to then rally everyone at gunpoint (if only!) to change all the tools accordingly, it's because of the fact that dicking around in Pod::Html RIGHT NOW EVERYBODY RIGHT NOW would be a total waste of time, because it's going to get replaced immanently. -- Sean M. Burke http://www.spinn.net/~sburke/
