On Jul 21, 2010, at 5:14 AM, Sean M. Burke wrote: > Says that an =over...=back region should consist of one of several > possibilities, one of which is: > > « > An "=over" ... "=back" region containing only "=item [text]" commands, each > one (or each group of them) followed by some number of ordinary/verbatim > paragraphs, other nested "=over" ... "=back" regions, or "=for..." > paragraphs, and "=begin"..."=end" regions. > > The "=item [text]" paragraph should not match "m/\A=item\s+\d+\.?\s*\z/" or > "m/\A=item\s+\*\s*\z/", nor should it match just "m/\A=item\s*\z/". > » > > So, it seems that this: > > =item 1 Stuff Tra La > > and even this > > =item 1. Stuff Tra La > > ...actually is legal. Since it isn't "=item 1" or "=item 1." (note the \z's > in the above regexps) or "=item", we fall thru to considering it "=item > [text]", which just happens to begin with a digit. > > BUT YES, is not, and should not, produce an ordered list item.
Thanks for the review. Pity, though, that `=item * Stuff` produces an unordered list item but `=item 1 Stuff` doesn't produce an ordered list item. That seems inconsistent to me. Frankly, we can't remove the former (lots of POD relies on it), but I could see modifying the spec to allow the latter, so as to be more consistent. Best, David
