Bug #98326 for Pod-Checker: Can we make “A non-empty Z<>” a warning and not an error

Greetings!

Per Karl Williamson=E2=80=99s request[1] before he makes any changes =
we=E2=80=99d like to run the idea past you all and get your feedback:

http://perldoc.perl.org/perlpodspec.html says about Z<>:

=E2=80=9CThis code is unusual is that it should have no content. That =
is, a processor may complain if it sees Z<potatoes> . Whether or not it =
complains, the potatoes text should ignored.=E2=80=9D

Z<potatoes> seems to fit under warnings (i.e. =E2=80=9Cmay complain=E2=80=9D=
 not =E2=80=9Cshould explode=E2=80=9D) better because it =E2=80=9Cmay =
not necessarily cause trouble, but indicate mediocre style.=E2=80=9D

I have an edge case where I essentially need inline comments in POD for =
some parser notation =
(https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=3D98322) and the only =
option ATM is =E2=80=9Cmediocre style=E2=80=9D of hacking Z<>.

Or, if not by default, can we have a way, a flag maybe, to ignore =
certain errors that we grok and are OK with?

Alternatively, a way to inhibit 'POD ERRORS' section from being rendered =
as part of the POD (e.g. send it to STDERR).

A fourth option would be to add a specific inline-comment formatter so =
you could #<potatoes> without error and without hacking Z<>. (it would =
be like Z<> but barf if it was empty)

After the RT discussion =E2=80=9Cmaking non-empty Z<> merely warn=E2=80=9D=
 seems OK, we just wanted it to be discussed here first. Thanks!

=E2=80=94
Dan Muey

[1] https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3D98326#txn-1787110