The current way that useheading influences links is broken in its logic.
We enabled useheading as we wanted pretty headings for pages and for Google results. useheading made sense as it used the first heading which is often the summary of your page, certainly in our case it was. The tracks where now useful and the pages summary appears cleaner in Google.
But we've had to disable because the actual links are unworkable. For instance, this used to work.
* [[Installation]] instructions are available...
* Please read the [[installation]] guide.
These render correctly and we have control over the grammar and the appearance of links.
Now if you think that the first heading is 'Installation Instructions' these sentence are being rendered like this:
* Installation Instructions instructions are available..
* Please read the Installation Instructions guide.
These break the intended reading. Also now think what will happen if you change the first heading to 'Installation Instructions for Pootle' even more brokenness.
1) Ensure that useheading does not change the behaviour of links. It only makes the <title> and breadcrumbs work but the actual links still point to the page name.
2) Separate the concept into something that can actually perform the task of creating pretty names. Something in the markup of pages.
This is why this is disabled by default. If you use the feature you should always give a link title when using links in a sentence. Like [[installation|installation]].
Use "[[Installation|Installation]] instructions are available..." instead ...!
I vote against changing the "use heading link behaviour" by default. Because that is exactly the intended behaviour and many people would be upset about it.
Maybe adding a config option to choose for either default behaviour or using "use heading link behaviour" only for breadcrumbs, index, title, etc might be a good idea!?
What exactly do you mean by "Separate the concept into something that can actually perform the task of creating pretty names."? Can you give an example?
andi: sure that would work, although its not very wiki'sh. Except it won't work on a wiki that is about 4 years old simply because nobody in their right mind want to edit a few hundred pages just to check that all the links are right.
ach: Same comment as above applies. I think your second paragraph answers your question, I'd like to see useheading (or something similar) working for the places where I want to see descriptive names as you say in breadscrumbs, title. Not sure about index though. I find the fact that links descriptions can change based on title odd to believe, I can't imagine someone really wants that behaviour, I'm sure all of those wikis are defaulting to the work around the andi proposes.