On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Karl Williamson <[email protected]>wrote:
> Perhaps what is meant in the comments is that you can't use L<> to link to > most =item's. If you need to refer to one, perhaps you should use C<> > markup to distinguish it from regular text. But the C<> would be a verbal > reference and not a clickable link. Ah, I think you are right. Thanks for clarifying. I don't know when the specification changed, but after another read of the current perlpodspec<http://perldoc.perl.org/perlpodspec.html#About-L%3C...%3E-Codes>, I have an answer: Previous versions of perlpod distinguished L<name/"section"> links from L > <name/item> links (and their targets). These have been merged > syntactically and semantically in the current specification, and *section*can > refer either to a "=head > *n* Heading Content" command or to a "=item Item Content" command. > Well, it is not an answer to my original question, but it helps me make the executive decision to consider "C<> links" as L<> links. Thanks for the help, Marc
