Actually, it does render differently:

``Point``

vs. :class:`!Point`

I don't have a strong preference; I could see an argument for it either way. On one hand, Point does represent a class, just one defined in the examples rather than in the module itself, so from that angle it would seem consistent to treat it like other class names, just unresolved, rather than as a variable. On the other, it could be considered example code snippet, since it isn't actually defined in the module itself, given the primarily purpose of the roles is for cross referencing.

@ezio-melotti @erlend-aasland what do you think? We can go with whatever you agree is best here, and presumably document that for the future at some point along with the rest of python/docs-community#52

In this case I prefer ``...``.

Since we already use (broken) :class: refs here, I'm fine with explicitly removing the links, and making the formatting consistent.

Thanks @CAM-Gerlach for the PR, and @erlend-aasland for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.10, 3.11.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

GH-96113 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch.

GH-96114 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.10 branch.