Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 05:15:23AM +0000, Daniel Westermann (DWE) wrote:
> > >On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:01:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > >Only the first mention of "factorial()" uses a link; the second item
> > >doesn't have any link.
> >
> > There are other places as well, like this on:
> > "The postgres_fdw supports these type of scans if async_capable is set."
> >
> > async_capable is not a link. Or this one:
> > "This speeds normalize() and IS NORMALIZED."
> >
> > I still think it should be more consistent and all should be links, even if they point to the same section.
>
> I am using standard typographic style, where the first mention of
> something is often italics, but later mentions might not be. I am not
> in favor of adding links to everthing that can have a link _unless_
> there is a unique URI for each item.
While I understand that's the approach you've been following, I don't
agree with it. Providing links gives users a way to find more
information and that applies to each equally. I don't believe users of
the website and release notes would be confused, upset, or otherwise
misunderstand when two items which are covered in the same place have a
repeated link for each of the items.
Thanks,
Stephen
