| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name
 | Date | Lines | 
|---|
| 344.1 | \TEXT gets you � way there... | AISG::WARNER | It's only work if they make you do it | Fri Jun 01 1990 10:39 | 10 | 
|  | If you're willing to use "Cats" and "Dogs" as the actual section titles, you
can do this by using:
	<REFERENCE>(cat_section\TEXT)
     and
	<REFERENCE>(dog_section\TEXT)
Still, your idea would be a lot more flexible!
 | 
| 344.2 | on the wishlist | OLD::UTT |  | Fri Jun 01 1990 11:11 | 6 | 
|  |     Yes, I like the <hotspot> idea, and will (what else?) put it on the
    wishlist for DOCUMENT postV2.0.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Mary
 | 
| 344.3 | Thanks | CRAYON::GENT | There is no poetry without madness -- Democritus | Fri Jun 01 1990 11:42 | 12 | 
|  |     Re: .1
    
    Hi Ross,
    
    Yes, I realize I can write around it. But, section titles 
    require initial caps (for example, "How to Declare Precedures and 
    Variables"). So they would still have to be handled as section titles,
    not as generic text in the sentence.
    
    Re: .2
    
    Thanks Mary!
 | 
| 344.4 | Remember subheads | COOKIE::RJOHNSTON |  | Fri Jun 01 1990 13:41 | 7 | 
|  | 
RE: .1
I concur with Andrew in .3 and point out that subheads don't take
symbols.  I'd find <HOTSPOT> extremely useful for subheads.
Rose
 | 
| 344.5 | An associated wish: capturing symbol names | CRAYON::GENT | There is no poetry without madness -- Democritus | Wed Jun 20 1990 22:04 | 28 | 
|  |     Hi Rose,
    
    I think you misunderstood. The <HOTSPOT> tag I am suggesting
    doesn't assign a symbol, it just creates a cross-reference to
    an existing symbol.
    
    But while I'm making requests... (ha!) I would also add the 
    following associated wishlist item:
    
    Please add a mechanism for cross-referencing "chunks" that do not have
    user-defined symbol names (such as subheads, as Rose suggests,
    and commands, routines, and statements in reference sections).
    One method I might suggest is to allow the user to assign a synonym
    for the current chunk's symbol. Something like:
    
    	<SUBHEAD1>(More on the subject)
    	<ONLINE_XREFERENCE>(MORE_STUFF)
    		.
    		.
    		.
    	For more on this subject, see <HOTSPOT>(MORE_STUFF\the preceding
    	section).
    
    An alternative is to allow the user to assign symbol names on the 
    <ONLINE_CHUNK> tag. (However, this might result in hack-y coding,
    such as <SUBHEAD1>(More on the subject) <ONLINE_CHUNK>(MORE_STUFF).)
    
    --Andrew
 | 
| 344.6 |  | OLD::UTT | anyone with any sense had already left town... | Thu Jun 21 1990 06:13 | 17 | 
|  |     Andrew,
    
    It's already on the wishlist to add symbol-defining capabilities to
    <subhead>, <command>, <routine>, etc. (I'd like to see <list> added to
    the list, too.) And I think it would be easier coding (and more
    consistent with DOCUMENT in general) to say:
    
    <subhead1>(More on the subject\more)
    
    The <online_chunk> tag, BTW, is a hack whose purpose in life is
    to break up large chunks of stuff (informal code examples, very
    long lists, and so on) that aren't otherwise broken up by headers,
    etc. and that TeX can't swallow and runs out of memory on (sort
    of like this sentence...). So it doesn't really apply for what you
    suggest.
    
    Mary
 |