> It's basically a glorified cross-reference. I didn't dislike directing the reader to the internals section enough to try and establish a better location for the main content.
One problem I see is that:
+ [..], but as there is no pre-existing data, visibility checks are unnecessary.
... allows a wide variety of interpretations, most of which will be wrong. And all in all I find an added paragraph somewhat cryptic.
Yeah, I'd probably have to say "but since no existing record is being modified, visibility checks are unnecessary".
Is there a specific mis-interpretation that first came to mind for you that I can consider specifically?
If the goal is to add a cross-reference I suggest keeping it short, something like "For additional details on various corner cases please see ...".
That does work, and I may end up there, but it feels unsatisfying to be so vague/general.
