> From: Didier Verna <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:44:29 +0200
> Cc: Texinfo Bugs <[email protected]>
> 
>   Well, although I cannot use it right now, I would hate to see it go
>   because it is the only solution there is to have really anything in
>   node names.
> 
>   The current solution I use is to replace problematic characters by
>   ugly sequences like <dot>, and soon by Unicode characters looking like
>   the original ones (Cf. the paper I sent you the other day). But these
>   solutions prevent readers from cut'n pasting the node names and get
>   the real thing.

May I ask why you need to have these characters in node names?

Node names are just labels; they don't need to be as meaningful as
section names.  So it's legitimate to make a node's name be a
shortened version of the corresponding section's name, and remove
those special characters in the process.  What exactly would suffer
from such shortening?

Reply via email to