* "David E. Wheeler" <[email protected]> [2010-11-12T13:56:01] > On Nov 12, 2010, at 4:18 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote: > >> I'd like to make them consistent. > >> > >> RJBS would not. > > > > That is a mischaracterization. You would like to make them consistent by > > changing the spec to allow new forms. I would like to make them consistent > > by fixing the long standing bug that renders them contrary to the > > specification. > > Right, but: > > a. It's not a bug, it's based on how Pod::Parser worked long before > Pod::Simple. > b. We'd break a lot of existing Pod if we changed it.
It is a bug, insofar as it is behavior not in line with the requirements of the specification. If you're saying that the specification was always mistaken in its attempt to document preexisting behavior, I will totally buy that. In that case, I would be all for seeing the spec fixed and then the implementation to match it -- but the spec has to be fixed! If I work on Pod-parsing tools, I need to be able to match them against the spec, not against a reference implementation that violates it. That's my main concern, here. -- rjbs
