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?
- [perl #44213] docs/faq.pod - fix L<foo|http://...>... via RT
- [perl #44213] docs/faq.pod - fix L<foo|http://.... Will Coleda via RT
- Re: [perl #44213] docs/faq.pod - fix L<foo|... Ron Blaschke
- Re: [perl #44213] docs/faq.pod - fix L<foo|http... Eric Wilhelm