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.
