On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:30 PM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 15/06/2020 12:05 p.m., Martin Maechler wrote: > >>>>>> Duncan Murdoch on Sun, 14 Jun 2020 07:28:03 -0400 writes: > > > > > I agree with almost everything you wrote, except one thing: this > > isn't > > > newly enforced, it has been enforced since the help system began. > > What > > > I think is new is that there are now tests for it. Previously those > > > links just wouldn't work. > > > > > Duncan Murdoch > > > > Yes, to all... including Duncan's agreement with Gábor. > > > > Also, Duncan M earlier did mention that he had wanted to > > *change* the link-to-file behavior for these cases (when he > > wrote most of the Rd2html source code) but somehow did not get it. > > Actually, I don't think I pushed for this change at the time (or at > least I didn't push much). I just wish now that I had, because I think > it will be harder to do it now than it would have been then. > > Duncan
I am not entirely sure, but maybe just documenting the current behaviour and undoing 78674 could work. With some tweaks? E.g. * updating R-exts to say that \link[pkg:topic]{text} will link to `topic.html` in `pkg` first (for historical reasons), and falls back to searching for `topic` in `pkg` at render time. * updating Rd2HTML to look for the topic and use it in the link, instead of throwing a warning, in it cannot find `topic.html` * removing the `R CMD check` warning for non-file links, that was added in 78674 :) Is there anything else? Gabor [...] ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel