Dan Nicholson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:04 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Author: bdubbs >> Date: 2008-11-05 14:04:29 -0700 (Wed, 05 Nov 2008) >> New Revision: 978 >> >> Modified: >> html/trunk/lfs/download.html >> Log: >> Add anchor for LFS reference >> >> Modified: html/trunk/lfs/download.html >> =================================================================== >> --- html/trunk/lfs/download.html 2008-08-25 16:00:47 UTC (rev 977) >> +++ html/trunk/lfs/download.html 2008-11-05 21:04:29 UTC (rev 978) >> @@ -42,7 +42,8 @@ >> <h2>Get the LFS 6.0 Hard Copy</h2> >> <p>You can find information about the printed version of the LFS 6.0 >> book on the <a href="/lfs/contribute.html#lfsbook">contribute page</a>.</p> >> >> - <h2 id="packages">Packages for LFS</h2> >> +<!-- name breaks validation, but needed for LFS book --> >> + <h2 id="packages"><a href="#" name="packages" ></a>Packages for >> LFS</h2> >> <p>LFS has a list of packages which you should download. Please use the >> versions which are >> <a href="/faq/#why-not-version">listed in the book</a>; these >> are tested versions which are known to work with each other. In >> addition to the packages you > > Isn't it legal to use <a id="packages" name="packages/> instead? That > seems to be what docbook does for the books.
id="packages" is already used in the <h2> construct. I didn't check if the css used it or not. Using name still won't validate for XHTML 1.1 anyway. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/website FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
