On 5 Mar 2008, at 18:50, Ian Malpass wrote:
The backwards-compatibility thing is important if you want your docs to be widely read by a disparate audience. Your suggested syntax renders a document near-useless (totally missing headers, plus error messages) if the POD reader isn't "enhanced POD" capable. That doesn't sound like a recipe for gaining traction.... The drawback of extra verbosity is that it requires documenters to remember to use it, though.
I think the only way to tackle that would be to produce interesting tools that made good use of the additional semantic information. But yeah, it's unlikely to happen overnight :)
-- Andy Armstrong, Hexten
