Nonsense. The link is there for a reason or it is there superfluously. It's up to the user/reader to decide to follow the link. Having said that, it is poor w

Nonsense. The link is there for a reason or it is there superfluously. It's up to the user/reader to decide to follow the link. Having said that, it is poor writing to simply link to an aside and not summarize or succinctly quote, in the body of your text, the link's referent. This means that the reader _must_ go off on the link to in order to understand your point. This I find very annoying and widely practiced. (It is also widely practiced to assume that a reader already is familiar with another piece or concept and _not_ linking to further information...) The bigger problem is that our browsers and web pages are poorly designed for such types of referencing. Earlier, pre-web, browsers tried a number of models, but all required lots of screen real estate. See Ted Nelson's writings for further examples (wink...)