Re: @ref without page numbers

[Christopher Dimech]

There might be no precedent, yet I have found a use case to highlight
the point in one of my mathematical documents.

Look at this

[Schimmel & Gallart (2007)], page 29, [Bensen, Ritzwoller et al. (2007)],
page 27, [Ventosa et al. (2017)], page 30,

and compare with this

[Schimmel & Gallart (2007)]^p29, [Bensen, Ritzwoller et al. (2007)]^p27,
[Ventosa et al. (2017)]^p30,

We can use @sup{pN} to remove the longer (full) page representation.
I had passed the document around and the full output was deemed problematic.

The problem not only occurs with printed but also with pdf.  And as you pointed
out the page number is required if the document is printed, and we can also 
solve
the readability problem that occurs with multiple @ref next to each other.

Was not aware that you tackled the task of removing the page number completely.
But, I am unsure how I can introduce your modification in my file to test it.

Nevertheless, my alternative brief page numbering would resolve the readability
problem pointed out to me.

Regards
Christopher

> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 at 11:44 PM
> From: "Gavin Smith" <gavinsmith0123@gmail.com>
> To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> Cc: "help-texinfo gnu" <help-texinfo@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: @ref without page numbers
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 10:40:52PM +0200, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > Dear Gavin,
> >
> > You are quite right, if the manual is printed, one needs the page numbers.
> >
> > I would be satisfied with an option in which the page number is printed
> > as a superscript @sup{page-no} (similar to footnote numbers) next to the
> > closing square bracket.
> >
> > That is, from this
> >
> > Section 1.13 [Intactv-Function], page 11,
> >
> > to this
> >
> > Section 1.13 [Intactv-Function]@sup{11},
> >
> > The would solve the problem, yet keep requirements intact.
> >
> > Regards
> > Christopher
>
> There's no precedent for this - this looks like a footnote reference.
> Would it not be simpler to miss out the page number, as in my patch
> here?
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-texinfo/2016-11/msg00048.html
>