Re: Discussing Extending the POD Spec

"Paul \"LeoNerd\" Evans" <[email protected]> writes:

> I don't want to turn this thread into a discussion on the features
> themselves, but rather to work out *who* are the people to really get
> into that chat, and what level of interest people have in actually
> moving forward.

I am interested.  I probably support the most primitive output formats,
but I am still intending to actively support those formatters, and follow
discussions here.  There are a few things that I've wanted to have in POD
for a while, although nothing that rose to the level of wanting to do the
work required to get it widely supported.

-- 
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~||<Juukn{=,<S~|}<Jwx}qn{<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD,
 00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print