Should not have to decide “what is better”, but “what it is”. A section is a section and a page is a page. Foo cannot be both. A block is part of a page and a page is part of a graph. A graph doesn’t have sections, it has nodes. And a page may have sections, but may not have other pages, unless they are embedded. A section doesn’t deserve its own page. The freedom to interchange these concepts is not desirable in my opinion. I can accept the use of a section to temporarily hold a future page, but it should be a conscious delay, not a permanent interchange for supposed convenience.
Maybe the confusion comes from the word “page”, when it is perceived as the page of a book, which may have an arbitrary size and content. But Logseq pages are not the pages of a book, they are books themselves. A book can be as small as a leaflet, but it is not made up of leaflets itself. When linking, the target is either a book or a position within a book, aka a bookmark. Books have titles, while bookmarks have some kind of coordinates (paths or ids). Bookmarks are not supposed to be remembered by humans, but by the used system. A given name to a bookmark like [Foo](((block-id))) is meaningful only within some context, while books like [[Foo]] can stand on their own (their context is the knowledge domain). A book’s Table of Contents is a strict hierarchy, but the book itself is not part of another hierarchy. Someone could place a book to some shelf of a room of a building of a city of a country of a planet of a galaxy, but this hierarchy is arbitrary. A book just happens to be there, its place is not part of its nature (ideally, it should be the result of a query).
If embedding affects the queries, it would make better sense to me to support more powerful queries, able to treat embedded content as local blocks. In another thread you said:
I think it is a similar case, wanting queries to look inside embedded pages, not to demote those pages into specially treated blocks (I even suspect that this may be already possible, but for that I would need specific material). By the way, wouldn’t your suggestion mess-up your metaphor in Graphical explanation of pages, blocks and references ?