From:	Larry Wall	Date:	Mon Aug 21 09:32:46 2000
Subject:	Re: RFC Suggest: Use of L<> to link RFCs; "CONFLICTS WITH", "REQUIRES", "STATUS" sections

John Porter writes:
: Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
: > Nathan Torkington wrote:
: > > Why not just L<RFC21> ?  It's shorter.
: > 
: > The main thing I have been struggling with is (to quote perlpod(1)):
: >         L<name>             manual page
: > whereas:
: >        L<name/"sec">       section in other manual page
: > 
: > Thus, I didn't think we'd want to pollute the man page space with our RFC's,
: > but I did think it might be possible that there would be a "perl6-RFCs" man
: > page, with sections for each RFC.
: 
: I think we can safely presume that the pod-to-foo translators will have
: been locally hacked to account for the RFC-ish nature of the documents.
: IOW, that L<RFC1> will be correctly translated into
: <a href="/rfc/1.html">RFC1</a> or some such.

I'd say it's a flaw in pod that you can't import a policy like that with
some sort of "=use" declaration.

Larry