* Autrijus Tang ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030328 04:57]: > Is there anything in POD explicitly forbidden or incompatible with > OODoc? If such conflicts necessarily exist, I'd be happy to rescind > my disagreement.
OODco (or whatever it will be called) has three phases: 1) parsing 2) inheritance resolving 3) formatting You can use different parsers: your own document syntax. I have created a syntax which looks a little bit like POD. You could call that OODF (Own Object Document Format) but there can also be a real POD parser (it will be sufficient to document non-OO modules) or even a DocBook parser [Johan take you chances ;-) ]... as long as each block of text starts with m/\A\=/ and ends on "=cut". The second phase is always the same: the object tree will get the packages relations. Then, there can be more than one formatter. To POD output is already implemented (although needs a little more tuning). Output to HTML is in the works. An example of output from my old implementation can be found in http://perl.overmeer.net/userid/html/ To come back to the actual question > Is there anything in POD explicitly forbidden or incompatible with > OODoc? I don't think that the POD parser can handle this =docbook <method name="clone" type="instance"> <parameters> </parameters> </method> =cut There is no parser for that in my suite eirther, but it can easily be added to phase 1, and then phase 2 and 3 stay the same. Different packages within a module can even use different parsers! Sufficiently shown that the capabilities of POD parsers is a subset of the OODoc system? -- MarkOv %-] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ drs Mark A.C.J. Overmeer MARKOV Solutions [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://Mark.Overmeer.net http://solutions.overmeer.net
