On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 06:58:22PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 12:35:07PM -0400, Gavin D. Smith wrote:
> > @@ -4547,6 +4547,7 @@ pointers (@pxref{Writing a Node}), although this is
> > not recommended.
> > When you delete or rename a node, it is usually a good idea to define an
> > @code{@@anchor} with the old name. That way, any links to the old node,
> > whether from other Texinfo manuals or general web pages, keep working.
> > +Place any such anchors immediately after the @samp{@@node} line.
> >
> > By default, links to anchors are unaffected by the
> > @code{xrefautomaticsectiontitle} setting (see @ref{Three Arguments,,
>
> Shouldn't it better be after the sectioning @-command associated to the
> @node? Right after the @node probably works both in texi2any and
> texinfo.tex, but in other places we ask to have the sectionning
> @-command right after the @node, if I recall well.
We do, and so the advice to put @anchor{...} directly after a @node
line does appear to contradict the other advice.
However, I suspect that it may make a difference (although I haven't
tested it). The sectioning command is used to print a section title.
If the anchor appears after the section title, then the anchor may
refer to a point in the node that is after the section title. However,
if the anchor is supposed to define a name that is synonymous with the
node name, then it should refer to the very beginning of the node,
before the section title.
I appreciate that the @node command and associated sectioning command
are very entangled so it may not be as simple as I have described.
