On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 07:13:42AM +0000, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > 2) an anchor with the untranslated name is added for each node
> > (and anchor and float)
> > 3) there is a mention in the Texinfo code of the untranslated name,
> > without any effect on the output (for example ignored macro
> > argument).
> > 4) no untranslated name at all.
> >
> > Option 2) should be practical in a transitory period for external manuals
> > linking to partially translated manuals.
> > 3) allows to do some grepping and similar (untranslated name could also
> > be obtained from the Texinfo tree using source marks) for maintainance,
> > and allows english speaking people to understand where in the manual one
> > is, but is otherwise similar to 4).
> >
> > What we could recommend:
> >
> > My proposal is to recommend to use 2) in the short term, and to switch
> > to 3) or 4) (depending on the need) in the long term when the
> > translation is complete enough and has been complete for some time. 2)
> > could also be used in the long term, but there is no clear use case
> > (except maybe for the lilypond manual).
> >
> > Remarks, thoughts?
>
> I would omit option 2 completely. It's too fragile IMHO; it might
> easily happen that anchors get inadvertently omitted if sections are
> moved around in a document.
I can't see why this would be particularly the case. Also, this option
could be implemented with a macro similar to the one used for option 3,
except that the English text would end up expanded in @anchor{} instead
of being ignored. To me, option 2 could be optional, but I think that
we should still recommend it if the manual is the target of external
cross-references from already translated manuals to give time to change
the external manuals cross-references to the newly translated manual.
> I think the same is true for option 4": I
> consider this option a nightmare to maintain if the documentation gets
> extended and rearranged but no translators are still active.
That is a good point in favor of keeping option 3 in the long term.
> Consequently, I favor option 3 followed by option 1 for documents
> started from scratch.
Option 1 is a natural starting point when starting from the English
manual, I agree, we could say it, but I think that when the translator
is ready to translate the node names, it is better to switch as soon as
possible to 2 (or 3), so 1 should be considered as short-lived.
--
Pat
