I understand the issue now. I had not seen the screenshots you sent. It seems like a good idea to change it but I'd like to look into the issue more.
Sorry for the delays…
> Le 12 nov. 2018 à 21:28, Gavin Smith <address@hidden> a écrit :
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 06:41:02PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
>> I was searching about conflicts in Bison on the web, and saw this:
>> « Understanding » is quite not a nice title, so I clicked to check, and got this:
> Where did you see « Understanding »?
I saw it on the Google’s page, as was represented in the screen capture I sent. Right now, on « bison conflicts », I get:
Understanding (Bison 3.2.1) - GNU.org
As documented elsewhere (see The Bison Parser Algorithm) Bison parsers are ... useless: STR; ^^^^^^^ calc.y: warning: 7 shift/reduce conflicts [-Wconflicts-sr].
>> Is there a means to use the section name rather that the node name in the generated HTML? It???s quite common to have a very short node name, but a fully blown section name, so the latter seems more appropriate to me.
>> Even in Texinfo???s own documentation, you have for instance the title « One argument », which hardly makes sense alone:
>> but the page is
>> 6.4.1 @xref with One Argument
> The URL of the page has to follow the node name so that other pages can
> link to it.
Sorry for not being clear: I was not referring in any way to the URL, I’m talking about the <title></title> of the page.
> I see on
> the link to the page is labelled "One argument" - is that the kind of
> thing you think could change?
> There is the "@xrefautomaticsectiontitle on" option, which may give some
> of what you are looking for.
That’s a nice feature I was unaware of, thanks! But that’s not my point. I’m claiming that the name of the section would be a better <title> than the node name.