Blindingly obvious trick when optimising figure positioning

[Syed Zaeem Hosain (Syed.Hosain@aeris.net)]

> If a figure is close to the cross-reference, why have a cross-reference at all?

For a number of reasons, in my case.

1. In my documents, figures generally have more than one cross-reference. Being consistent with the "close" cross-references working the "same way" as farther ones when clicked on (in the typical PDF's I generate), is better than making assumptions about any text being "close enough" to _not_ need a cross-reference.

2. If there is only one cross-reference initially, and it is near to the figure, I still choose to be consistent - later revisions to the document may add cross-references in other locations.

3. The figure caption may get edited. With cross-references that include the caption (my rule: the first occurrence of the reference to a figure has the caption), that changed caption text is reflected in the body text referring to it.

4. With my PDF's, sometimes the figure ends up on a different page than the text referring to it - this may be unavoidable with larger figures.

5. When text before the cross-reference or figure is added later and/or edited, the separation of figure and cross-reference can occur easily and may waste time going back and fixing missing ones.

Bottom line: As far as I am concerned, a cross-reference in body text that refers to a figure is a requirement, no matter where the text is in relationship to the figure.

Z