* Marc Green <pongu...@gmail.com> [2011-08-11T06:40:17] > > perlpodspec states "Pod processors must tolerate a bare "=item" as if it > were "=item *"." Is Pod::Checker's behavior still in line with perlpodspec? > Is the use of '=item' without any parameters deprecated? Or should that > warning be removed from Pod::Checker?
Pod::Checker's behavior isn't wrong, but its claims are. It says: "=item" without any parameters is deprecated No, it isn't. Maybe somebody wishes that it was, but it isn't. It sounds like nobody thinks it needs to be. I think it's fine for Pod::Checker to have opinions of style, in some cases, but I don't think this makes any sense. The meaning of "=item" is well-documented. I think the warning can and should go. > Given that there is clearly a use for =itemless =over/=back blocks, should > it still be a warning? I think no, and instead, Pod::Checker should warn > about an empty =over/=back block, one that contains nothing but whitespace. You've already heard my opinion on this one, but for everyone else: I think this warning is bogus. =over/=back without =item is well-documented. Some formatters don't handle it correctly, but better to fix them than to suggest that this is in any way problematic Pod. If someone wants to come forward and tell us that, say, the four most-used Pod formatters will actually *lose* these sections, that's a different matter. But that isn't my experience. -- rjbs
