To clarify, the idea would be to use an @anchor without '-',
e.g. @anchor{User defined macros} seems suitable here.However, my goal is that the link generated when clicking '¶' next to a given heading corresponds to the desired anchor. If it's not possible to improve that, indeed, the point is moot. Thanks! On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 11:14 AM Sebastian Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, an @anchor command for the old name is used when > renaming a @node such that old links still jump to the right section > (not just to the top of the page). There were no relevant > renamings in the R manuals over the past few years. > > One could add alternative anchors for selected sections but anchors are > treated identically to nodes when it comes to creating XHTML identifiers > (and also regarding allowed characters), so a dash would still be > converted to "_002d", see > < > https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/html_node/HTML-Xref-Node-Name-Expansion.html > >. > > The linked URLs are not usually visible, so I'm not too worried about > \manual{R-exts}{User-defined macros} creating a hyperlink to > < > https://cloud.R-project.org/doc/manuals/R-exts.html#User_002ddefined-macros > >. > > The *one* case where I just recently considered adding a custom @anchor > was R-FAQ 7.31 > < > https://CRAN.R-project.org/doc/manuals/r-devel/R-FAQ.html#Why-doesn_0027t-R-think-these-numbers-are-equal_003f> > > as it has been referenced so many times by its number. The simple > @anchor{7.31} turns into #g_t7_002e31 ... only @anchor{FAQ 7 31} gives a > reasonable #FAQ-7-31. Of course that identifier would then only be > available in specific (future) versions of the R-FAQ so it would take a > while until it could be preferred over the long-standing existing ID. > Furthermore, such alternative identifiers wouldn't usually be > known/visible as they would not be used as hyperlinks in the HTML manual > itself: the navigation links would still be based on the node name and > the section id on the section name. So I think there is little benefit > in adding extra anchors. > > In the exceptional case of R-FAQ 7.31, renaming the node and adding a > description for the auto-generated menu in the Info manual might be an > option (but I didn't test this thoroughly): > > @node FAQ 7 31 > @nodedescription Why doesn't R think these numbers are equal? > @anchor{Why doesn't R think these numbers are equal?} @c old name > @section Why doesn't R think these numbers are equal? > > Best regards, > > Sebastian Meyer > > > Am 03.10.25 um 20:35 schrieb Michael Chirico: > > Hi all, > > > > I happened to notice that linking to the 'User-defined macros' paragraph > in > > R-exts produces a less-than-fully-scrutable link [1]. grep-ing around I > > found others peppered in the manuals, e.g. [2] [3]. > > > > In markdown (the flavors I'm used to, at least), we'd use something like > > {#User-defined-macros} to customize the link as well as make it more > stable. > > > > I'm not particularly familiar with Texinfo, but a quick search around > > suggests we could use '@anchor' tags to augment what's produced > > automatically from '@node'. [4] [5] > > > > It's fairly minor but would be a nice quality-of-life improvement; if > > agreed, I think it would be a nice R-dev-day issue, too. One important > > consideration is back-compatibility -- we'd like to ensure any existing > > links with the "ugly" text continue to work. I believe that just means > > leaving the '@node' unchanged. An advanced 3rd-order consideration would > be > > to look at the history of the '@node' text and generate new '@anchor' > > entries if any have changed to retroactively improve back-compatibility. > > > > Mike C > > > > [1] > > > https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-devel/R-exts.html#User_002ddefined-macros-1 > > [2] > > > https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-admin.html#index-Installing-under-Unix_002dalikes > > [3] > > > https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/R-data.html#Spreadsheet_002dlike-data > > [4] > > > https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#g_t_0040anchor > > [aside, somewhat funny that Texinfo themselves leave this messy link here > > :) ] > > [5] > https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#Nodes > > > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > > > ______________________________________________ > > [email protected] mailing list > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
