Re: [O] Structured links to headings with endless depth

[ST]

On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 14:26 +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > I think this kind of linking is useful for many general cases. Christian
> > has expressed concerns that such links are easily breakable which is
> > true but only for documents that are in draft phase (or those which are
> > supposed to be restructured on regular basis - like ToDo lists). However
> > documents that has been published, like books or scientific papers, and
> > will no longer change - will benefit greatly from such linking option.
> > Imagine you have a scientific paper in your archive that you have
> > already published and removed write access from it in order not to
> > change it accidentally. You do want to reference certain
> > chapter:section:subsection from it in your new paper, which you are
> > currently writing, but creating a target <<chapter:section:subsection>>
> > in the old paper is no longer an option...
> >
> > So may I ask as a feature request, to please add, following link type as
> > standard to the org-mode:
> >
> > [[path/to/file.org::chapter:section:subsection:etc:optional target]]
> >
> > - chapter/section/subsection could be also just numbers
> > - optional target target might be <<optional target target>>
> > - there is no need to add '*' (like
> > [[path/to/file.org::*chapter:section]] to the link, as ':' after '::'
> > imply that headings are referred.
> >
> > Thank you!
> 
> Again, even in the case you are talking about, CUSTOM_ID is better, for
> at least two reasons:
> - it leads to much simpler links: [[file.org::#my-id]]

Why [[file.org::#1:2:1]] is nicer than [file.org::1:2:1]]?

> - it translates nicely to "id" tag in HTML.

You can generate the "id" tag in HTML like this 1-2-1 (if HTML dislikes
1:2:1 tag)

> 
> I understand this was not so useful in your use case (only headlines, no
> contents), but, it is still valid as a general mechanism.

Isn't a good idea to add such a built in link type in the long term?

Thank you!