Have you looked at Pod::Weaver? It's usually used as part of
Dist::Zilla, but it absolutely can be used on its own, and it's great
for parsing pod documents into separate pieces. I'm also a big fan of
Pod::Simple.

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 3:59 PM Harald Jörg <h...@posteo.de> wrote:
>
> Hello Pod-People,
>
> I hope that I don't start a religious war with this question.
> I found this mailing list advertised in the Pod::Simple docs, so I would
> accept a bias towards Pod::Simple based solutions :)
>
> So here's what I want to do: Extract Pod from a bunch of (ca 100) Perl
> modules and Pod files and convert it to HTML.  Or XHTML.  Anything good
> for today's browsers is fine.  Sounds pretty TIMTOWTDI, but every way
> I've tried so far has minor issues, and I've some requirements for which
> I haven't found an existing solution yet.
>
> The issues are rather harmless:
>
>  - Pod::POM is what's used today in the software to create the HTML
>    docs.  It fails to process L<The Perl Homepage|https://www.perl.org>
>    links correctly.
>
>  - Pod::Simple::HTML produces invalid HTML (nested 'a' elements) when a
>    heading or item contains a Link like this:
>
>      =head1 Start at L<https://www.perl.org>
>
>  - Pod::Simple::XHTML apparently makes no effort to find content for the
>    <title> element (nor does core pod2html, BTW).
>
> And there are a few things I miss.  They could be implemented in a
> subclass of either of these, or even provided as an enhancement via Pull
> Request:
>
>  - A custom link resolver: I want links to documents within the project
>    to be relative, but link to other CPAN modules to be
>    absolute. Preferably to metacpan.org instead of search.cpan.org.
>
>  - A custom table of contents
>
>  - Custom (or just different) backlinks to top of page
>
>  - Decent heuristics for page titles (Pod::Simple::PullParser does that
>    marvelously)
>
>  - ...and some more, but not enough to roll out my own converter.
>
> So, which if the modules is considered "state of the art" by the Pod
> People?  Which one of them is least likely to be deprecated?
>
> Do others have similar requirements?
> --
> Cheers,
> haj

Reply via email to