On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 04:29:47AM +0000, 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 the command > `@xrefautomaticsectiontitle`, which makes `@xref` and friends actually > print the sectioning title instead of the node name. > > For the `@anchor` command, however, there is no such pairing. This > means that currently a third argument must be added to `@xref` to get > the desired effect.
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 get what the second argument to anchor would correspond to besides controlling directly the output of @ref in a more centralized manner (but only inside a manual not for cross references). As a side note, I think that the second and third argument of @ref should have been avoided in the language from the beginning... -- Pat
