On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 11:57 AM Gavin Smith <gavinsmith0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 07:53:08AM -0800, Raymond Toy wrote: > > > > I think links for @anchor is important since it's something the author > had > > > to say explicitly, so having that available in html seems appropriate. > > > Perhaps I'll change my mind after I see what you've done so far. > > > > > Having seen these new links, I'm not sure what to do about anchors. In > > maxima's manual, the anchors often point to the first entry of a deffoo. > > So now there would be two links to the same place, with different ids. > In > > this case, it's not terrible. But if there's an @ref to some @anchor, to > > get the link you'd have to find any @ref pointing the anchor to get the > > link. That's not so convenient. > > For @def* and @*table there is a clear "heading" which the link can > be attached to. In contrast, @anchors (like index entries) could be > anywhere. I don't think it would always look good to have a copiable > anchor link (what do you call these things? - "permalink" seems to be > promising too much) and there may not be a good place to put them. > As with index entries, I feel that @anchors should be invisible at > the target (although it would be interesting to see any examples from > documents where having a copiable link for an @anchor would work well). > Hard to say. I'm partially guided by what some W3C specs do. For example, https://www.w3.org/TR/webaudio/#render-quantum This link defines what a "render quantum" is, and clicking on it also brings up a list of where this term is referenced and also provides a link to be copied. I think this is useful. However, I'm not saying this needs to be implemented in texinfo. > > Texinfo's own manual mainly uses @anchor for renamed nodes so that > old links still work. Copiable links here would not be useful. > I think maxima's manual is essentially the same. All the anchors are basically placed just before some deffoo. -- Ray
