On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 01:41:41PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2020-05-22 18:45, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Ugh, I see what you mean. I have read doc/src/sgml/README.links many > > times and still get confused. What you are saying is that if there is > > no xreflabel on a target, you can get the chapter/section via <xref> or > > specify text via <link>. But, if there is an xreflabel on the target, > > you can't get the chapter/section anymore --- you can only get the > > xreflabel via <xref>, or specify text via <link>, right? > > I think that's right. > > > I added 13 xreflabels in commits 85af628da5 and 75fcdd2ae2. What I am > > thinking of doing is to look at all references to the id's associated > > with those xreflabels and remove the xreflabel if the chapter/section > > is required, and if not, convert <link> to <xref> where the link text > > matches the xreflabel. Does that sound like a good plan? > > Both of those commits should be reverted. > > I don't quite understand your plan, but if you mean, check whether anyone > else links to the id in question, that doesn't sound sustainable. A new > link could be added at any time in the future. > > I think the release notes should either just use a plain <xref> to link and > use whatever generated text it gets, or if you don't like that, use <link>. > Which is basically what it was before, IIRC.
I can adjust things, but what logic are we following? Before my patch, sepgsql had an xreflabel, and vacuumlo did not. I would like to have a documented policy of where we should have xreflabels, and where not, and I can then adjust things to match. I don't mind using <link> but it is confusing to be able to reference xreflabels in some places and be required to use link in others. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
