> I do not like the automatic association of an inline command like
> @anchor, that may happen anywhere, to another command. I think that
> it would be cleaner to have an @-command with two arguments,
> instead, like
>
> @anchorlabel Bows, Bögen
>
> A comma in the anchor part would need to be escaped.
>
> If we want an heading command with a specific anchor, similarly I
> think that it would be better to have the anchor as argument instead
> of an automatic association, like
>
> @headinganchor Bows, Bögen
>
> For heading, having a line command giving the anchor would be
> consistent with the remaining of the language, too, like
>
> @headinganchor Bows
> @heading Bögen
All of these ideas look good to me.
> Note that having separate anchor and label most likely requires
> changing diverse things, because the anchor part always need to be
> 'hidden'. For instance cross references should be like @ref{Bows,
> Bögen, Bögen, manual}, which complexifies somewhat cross-references
> writing.
Well, with Gavin's suggested `@xrefautomaticsectiontitle` command, I
would only have to write `@ref{Bows}` to see `Bögen`. Or am I missing
something?
Werner
