I think that this is actually a good thing.
To read the FAQ, one would come across a quote saying that perl, as it stands, cannot be reduced to BNF. This is what we in academics call a "bad thing"(tm).
Of course, this is similar to the arguments that make C++ "bad," which is not to say that it is bad, but that it could be "better."

If they rewrite perl from the ground up, they can plan the grammar and semantics to be more uniform and correct, which will only help the language in the long run, and guarantee it a place in future useage. Perl has also developed in ways that require the next development to sort of regroup and bring the code a bit more together.

The way I see it, perl is a great language, and Larry Wall hasn't done us wrong yet. This can only be a good thing. Besides this sort of thing happens often as the needs of programmers change. There is old Ada and Ada95, a hundred cousins of LISP, and so forth. Change is inevitable, and this can only make a good thing better.

Just Another Perl Backpacker