On 03/05/05, Edward Z. Yang <edwardzyang(a)thewritingpot.com> wrote:
I'd still
like to see
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1521 implemented first
though, or some other way of creating more stable section anchors.
At first I though this would be some controversial feature, but checking
out the bug page, it seems quite reasonable. It would help greatly in
all cases where anchors are used (although it would take a while to get
it standardized and stuff, plus, old links would break as soon as the
new ones were added even if the title itself didn't change).
Not necessarily - the way I see it, the existence of "sticky" anhors
on headings more-or-less *requires* the ability to specify *multiple*
anchors for a heading anyway. For instance, if an article is
rearranged such that two topics, previously under different headings,
are merged (say, "Appearances on TV" and "Appearances on Radio"
become
"Appearances in the media"), the new heading should have the "sticky
anchors" for both old headings (as well, perhaps, as one of its own) -
otherwise, the links to them will become invalid. It would therefore
make perfect sense for the actual displayed heading to be treated as a
valid anchor *alongside* any manual ("sticky") anchors.
In other words, something like ==Appearances in the
media|Media|Radio|TV== would show as "Appearances in the media", and
define 4 anchors: "#Appearances_in_the_media", "#Media",
"#Radio", and
"#TV".
--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]