> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 23:12:38 GMT > From: [email protected] (Karl Berry) > Cc: [email protected] > > However, what we could do, perhaps, is warn by default in the > problematic cases and invent a separate warning flag just for this > (--no-warn-node-names) or something. I have always resisted splitting > warnings apart into a zillion categories a la gcc, but this case is > perhaps important enough to be an exception. > > Another approach, and another reason we've never warned about it, is > that what we really want is to allow any characters in node names (or > anywhere else). It would be better to give warning if we could also > inform people how they could change the source to use it. I still have > not imagined any worked-out solution for that, though. And since it > necessarily involves changes to Info readers (as far as I can imagine), > the resulting Info files would not be very widely usable. > > All in all, it's an unhappy mess and I just haven't had the gumption to > untangle it.
The current situation proliferates Info files with buggy behavior in at least one Info reader, if not all of them. Please consider improving this in some way; leaving the situation unchanged is IMO the worst of all alternatives. Thanks.
