> > This just doesn't seem to be the right way of handling HTML named > > anchors, even if it works for most documents because of the accident > > that in most HTML documents (I assume) the named anchors are at the > > beginning of a text. > > Lots of HTML is written poorly. We can't do much to help that, > other than try to educate people in how to architect their pages properly.
But there is nothing necessarily poorly architected about a page with named anchors in the middle of a paragraph. It would be a perfectly reasonable way, e.g., of rendering the index of a book into HTML, or of rendering links from a concordance, or any number of things. The way I described of handling footnotes is perfectly natural. See, for instance, http://www.newmanreader.org/works/development/chapter6-1.html#return5 . There, the body of the book has links to a footnotes, and each footnote has a link back to the body of the text. This is a natural way of doing it. It also lets you browse through other footnotes, and if something strikes your fancy, you can then take the link back to see where that was footnoted. I don't in fact see any good alternative way of handling this in HTML. I think I've also seen similar ways of handling endnote/footnote references in HTML documents converted from LaTeX. This is the natural way of doing it. It is, I assume, correct HTML used appropriately. The way I've described of handling concordance links is also perfectly natural. See for instance all IntraText CT database concordances, e.g.: http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITA0614/_HL.HTM . (In that example, though, one could live with current Plucker handling because the paragraphs are pretty short.) The architecture is VERY convenient. Alex _______________________________________________ plucker-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
