Will Coleda via RT wrote: > Seems like a pretty straightforward patch, but isn't the L<> syntax > used currently proper? Is there a particular pod reader we're trying > to make happy?
I tripped over this recently too. >From perlpod: * "L<scheme:...>" Links to an absolute URL. For example, "L<http://www.perl.org/>". But note that there is no corresponding "L<text|scheme:...>" syntax, for various reasons.