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 <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
