I absolutely did read that—I read the entire thread before responding since it seemed that none of he suggestions thus far had actually worked.
GitHub doesn’t deal with the “good suggestions” correctly, so I didn’t include them in my first Gist posted. I tried them first—I not only did read the mail you’re claiming I didn’t, I wrote a new Org file to test the suggestions within before posting anything. But here’s a Gist displaying a rendered Org file using those “good suggestions”:
It doesn’t handle the link correctly, and, if you make it long enough on a given line, the bare sliced-in-twain URL you must cut and paste and remove spaces from if you want to use the URL will still horizontally scroll.
Since it doesn’t work on GitHub—which is where you said you published to and care about—I’m mystified on how it’s a “good suggestion” where my syntax is not. (No disrespect meant to Nicolas at all—they *were* good suggestions, insofar as they were worth trying. But I tried them.)
I answered suggesting a different course because I thought you cared about how it actually displayed, not how it might display if the software worked differently than it does.
The other “good suggestion” was link abbreviations. My Gist given above
gives one of those as well, and that one, GitHub doesn’t even make any attempt at—it just displays it as plain text.
Note: if GitHub did deal with these “good suggestions” correctly, it would display just “lastIndexOf”—just like my Gist does in its first hyperlink, except mine says “long link” where that says “lastIndexOf”. But yet apparently that working example is *not* a “good suggestion”, though, compared to the ones that don’t work. (If you generally find examples that don’t work acceptable, you can just insert {{{dwim}}} into any place in your file you want a link, and it’ll do what you mean, whatever that is. It works great on every implementation that supports it!)
If you are being incredibly clear and I’m being incredibly obtuse, fine—I’ll drop it and someone who can divine what the heck you’re asking for can respond instead. Or, you can continue attacking me for not reading what you wrote when I literally included quoted material from you in a file I published to illustrate the issue. Be my guest.