On 2/7/2024 11:07 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> I'm not against subdividing that section.  My point was that if you
> want these commands to be easier to find, the subdivision itself is
> not enough; you need additional measures.

I think you and Stefan have successfully convinced me that there's no 
need to try and fuss with making arbitrary divisions of the built-in 
commands. It's tricky to split them up just right, and time spent on 
that should go towards adding indexing instead.

> No objections here.  But once again: your points about being able to
> find the commands by categories are well-taken, and adding indexing to
> make that easier would also be a good change.

Attached are some initial improvements to the indexing (patch 0003 in 
the series). It would probably be worth adding concept indices to 
most/all of the built-in commands, but the few I added here are pretty 
straightforward, and I can just poke at this a bit at a time for the 
remainder. (Writing documentation isn't the most viscerally exciting 
thing to do, so I prefer to spread the work out.)

I also added patch 0002, which moves the indexing above the "@item"s. 
That way, when you navigate to the entry from the index, it shows the 
header line listing the supported arguments when viewing the 
documentation as HTML.