I was trying to make the least disruptive change I could, but if simply
removing the redundant text would be more acceptable, I'd be happy to
rework my patch to do that.

On Oct 14, 2017 3:07 PM, "Glenn Morris" <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:

> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > The absolute majority of your proposed changes are in the doc strings,
> > where we already have a direct link to the documentation of a symbol
> > whose name precedes "which see".  So whether the reader understands
> > that or doesn't, the link is already there to click on, and no harm is
> > done by a relatively rare use of this phrase.
>
> IMO there is no benefit either, as you explain above. "which see" is an
> anachronism in the age of hyperlinks. Is there any logic to where these
> "rare uses" appear - why do some links get them and most not? If there's
> no logic and no benefit, they should be removed as unnecessary verbiage.
>