Concerning recommendations for internal links using placeholders

I am not convinced that the arguments behind the recommendations offered under the community docs Dynamic or static links and HTML in translatable strings regarding use of placeholders for links in translatable text apply well in all cases. We are told that this is bad:

Bad examples:

..
$BAD_INTERNAL_LINK = t('To get an overview of your administration options, go to !administer in the main menu.',
array('!administer' => l(t('the Administer screen'), 'admin'),

There seem to be 2 main arguments against this.

The 1st I accept in some cases:

The link text then becomes isolated, not part of the flow of the sentence at all. This is a big problem for translation.

Sometimes one needs the context to be able to translate the link title, but not always; sometimes the link title is clear anyway, and then I feel the above form should be permitted. (In the example, I agree that 'the Administer screen' might in rare cases cause confusion, but not all link titles do.)

The 2nd I disagree with:

.. the translator has no idea that a link is happening behind the placeholder, let alone the text of the link, so translation combinations from such solutions tend to be funny instead of professional.

That's easily solved by simply using something like this, with '@link-' in the placeholder name, which could become an acceptable convention:

$CLEAR_INTERNAL_LINK = t('To get an overview of your administration options, go to @link-administer-screen in the main menu.',
array('@link-administer-screen' => l(t('the Administer screen'), 'admin'),

I certainly don't agree that the above is worse (in all cases) than having quite complex HTML markup included in the string to translate like this:

Good examples::

..
$internal_link = t('To get an overview of your administration options, go to <a href="@administer-page">the Administer screen</a> in the main menu.',
array('@administer-page' => url('admin'),
));

Feedback and discussion welcome.