Re: @dircategory (Re: Translating Emacs manuals is of strategic importance)

> On Jan 6, 2024, at 23:04, Eli Zaretskii <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2024 13:49:53 +0000
>> From: Jean-Christophe Helary <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
>> 
>> Thinking out loud here, but @node currently requires the node-name
>> argument and has next/preious/up optional argument. It seems to me that
>> most of the issues would be fixed by adding a fifth argument that acts
>> like the cross-references' second argument (online-label). That way,
>> node-name can stay as it is and act as the pointer but is displayed as
>> "online-label", which is the translated part.
> 
> Maybe this will be a solution, I don't know.  (But note that the
> next/preious/up arguments are basically obsolete and almost never used
> nowadays.)

Sure, but adding a 4th argument would be compatible with the current 
state of affairs.

>> Same for the cross-references, if we generalize the use of 2 or 3
>> arguments.
> 
> Cross-references already support 5 arguments.

I know. That's why I'm saying generalize their use.

> I think we'd need something more complex there.  One possibility could 
> be some kind of "translation table" inside an Info file, which maps 
> English node names to translated names.

Interesting. Is such a "translation" file already used in parts of 
Emacs (obviously not in relation to natural language translations)?

It seems to me that using things/concepts that already exist keeps the 
internal logic of the tool, while adding new processes adds to the 
complexity of things. But there are more things that I do not 
understand in Emacs/TexInfo than things I do, so I'll leave this 
consideration at that.