On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 04:56:26PM +, Gavin Smith wrote:
> Having removed @anchor from the scope of "@xrefautomaticsectiontitle",
> there is now a reason to add a new command that affects @anchor only.
>
> Your proposal from a few days ago of using a @*heading command appears
> relevant. We c
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 10:52:35AM +, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> At least for the LilyPond documentation, there are various reasons.
>
> * For translators, having the same anchor name as in the original
> document helps a lot in translation. And vice versa, it helps
> maintainers who don't s
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 10:52:35AM +, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > I get the reasoning, but it is not clear to me why one would want to
> > use something else than the @anchor argument for a link. There
> > aren't much constraints on anchor content, except that it should be
> > unique. I do not
>> Rationale: The `@node` command is tightly bound with a section
>> command like `@chapter`; this gets reflected by the command
>> `@xrefautomaticsectiontitle`, which makes `@xref` and friends
>> actually print the sectioning title instead of the node name.
>>
>> For the `@anchor` command, howeve
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 04:29:47AM +, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
>
> I suggest to add a second, optional argument to `@anchor` that gives
> the default printed label.
>
> Rationale: The `@node` command is tightly bound with a section command
> like `@chapter`; this gets reflected by
