Re: RFC 357 (v2) Perl should use XML for documentation insteadofPOD

[Frank Tobin]

Nathan Wiger, at 09:56 -0700 on Wed, 4 Oct 2000, wrote:

> I suspect the fate of this RFC with be a "veto", and it will get just as
> ignored as if it had never existed.

I would argue there exists an important difference between a 'veto'
ignore, and a 'retracted' ignore.

A 'retracted' ignore means that there is no reason whatsoever to consider
this RFC ever; there is something 'better' out there, or there is some
fundamental flaw or contradiction in it to prevent its coming-to-be.  It
is 'invalid' for some reason.

A 'veto' ignore means that at the present time, this RFC does not have
support for it. However, in the future, given better arguments, or a sway
in the universe of Perl, the RFC might be re-looked at, and we can be
re-reminded of the arguments for and against the issue.  It is still a
'valid' RFC.

(Please don't take this to mean I'm still really really trying to push the
RFC; the above I meant to write concerning RFC's in general).

-- 
Frank Tobin             http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/