Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> The way to wrap it is like this:
>
>   @w{@kbd{C-h f make-vector @key{RET}}}
>
> Is this what you tried?  If so, how did it not work?

Sorry, I misunderstood.  OK, so I've added that, and it works.

I also fixed an incorrect line break in another place by adding @w{..}.

> I'd prefer:
>
>  1. You didn't specify a command's symbol
>  2. Symbol is not a command: %s

Changed in the attached.

>> Should the more technical explanations therefore stay?
>
> If it's 110% impossible to trigger those messages, they can go, of
> course.  The question is: can some completion trickery cause
> completing-read return with a value that is either not a symbol or a
> symbol whose function definition is void?

I'm also worried about third-party code calling in.
Perhaps we should better leave it, as it can't hurt.

>> ->> Try typing C-h f previous-line <Return>.
>> +>> Try typing C-h x previous-line <Return>.
>>     This displays all the information Emacs has about the
>>     function which implements the C-p command.
>
> Perhaps the text here should be amended not to mention "function".

Hmm.  OTOH, it is kind of nice to read that explanation as the first
thing you'll see is something like:

    (next-line &optional ARG TRY-VSCROLL)

So the user will worry less if she has first seen that explanation,
maybe?

I've attached an updated patch.