I agree. It’s important to keep in mind that this is kind of a bonus feature. If people take the time to link to something specific, then great. (If I’m understanding correctly) Otherwise it’s a help to the readers of the post even if the person posting doesn’t make the extra effort to put in the link.
Ah, it actually wasn’t clear to me! I think dotted underlines usually indicate a definition is available if you hover, eh? From the standpoint of a general reader of posts, will it really matter if they were auto linked or not? I guess my point is that for that general reader, they would have no idea that dotted links were auto generated or even what auto generated links were at all.
I think for usability even the auto generated links should be styled in the same way as regular links, possibly with the addition of dotted underline.
As a side note, I’m an Accessibility Dark Theme user so for me the links are usually yellow, which I think is great. But to see what was going on, I tried out the Accessibility Light Theme and I find the gray color of the regular links to be awful. I don’t see how gray text could be considered accessible at all. Usually it indicates something is unavailable or possibly a link visited. I find it really hard to see where the links are. But I guess if no one else has complained then it’s not an issue? If it was really going to be an accessible theme, the links should be underlined for maximum usability. Anyway, just my $0.2.
@musiko, Is this live on the site now? Looks like it is. Amazing!
Edit: Just for completeness, I tried the legacy theme and it looks like auto generated and regular links are both styled the same. I’d also note that the very thin yellow underline on links doesn’t seem great for accessibility either.
This just in—all major collections are now supported. No need to copy and paste links to the suttas from browser any more, simply put an abbreviation to the specific sutta in the post and let Discourse do its magic (may require browser refresh once).
It’s best to use standard abbreviations: DN, MN, SN, AN, Dhp, Iti, Snp, Thag, Thig and Ud for consistency, but upper, proper and lowercase all work.
These should all work now (for legacy purposes only!—use dot notation for all new entries to D&D), with a caveat: legacy notation uses simplified rules which in some cases match non-existent sutta IDs to invalid SC links!
Colon rule will map all existing entries on D&D. While it will also work for new entries I recommend using dot notation as it is more precise (it will not map invalid SC links as opposed to the colon rule).