Fix links (#667)

exercism · Mar 10, 2024 · e488938 · e488938
1 parent fb811d9
commit e488938
Show file tree

Hide file tree

Showing 2 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions.
diff --git a/exercises/practice/allergies/.approaches/bitwise-and-list/content.md b/exercises/practice/allergies/.approaches/bitwise-and-list/content.md
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ This is potentially useful, but means that if there was ever a need for non sequ
  "Elm Review"
 [elm-review-no-missing-type-constructor]:
  https://package.elm-lang.org/packages/Arkham/elm-review-no-missing-type-constructor/latest/
- "No Missing Type Constuctor rule for Elm Review
+ "No Missing Type Constuctor rule for Elm Review"
 [bitwise-and-list-solution]:
  https://exercism.org/tracks/elm/exercises/allergies/solutions/ceddlyburge
  "Bitwise and List solution on exercism"

diff --git a/exercises/practice/allergies/.approaches/introduction.md b/exercises/practice/allergies/.approaches/introduction.md
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ toList score =
 
 This code is idiomatic in Elm and is concise.
 
-However, the code does not fully embrace the domain concept of using the bit positions in the allergy score to represent a list of `Allergy`.
+However, the code does not fully [embrace the domain concept][embed-domain-concepts] of using the bit positions in the allergy score to represent a list of `Allergy`.
 
 Also the compiler does not guarantee that the `allergies` list contains all the `Allergy` types.
 You can use the [type iterator pattern][type-iterator-pattern] (more details at the end of this page) or use the [no missing type constructor][elm-review-no-missing-type-constructor] rule in [Elm Review][elm-review] to fix this.
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ Therefore, in general, go with the approach that _makes the most sense_.
 
 All approaches listed here are valid choices unless marked otherwise.
 
-[bitwise-and]:
+[bitwise]:
  https://package.elm-lang.org/packages/elm/core/latest/Bitwise
  "Bitwise documentation"
 [bitwise-and-list]:
@@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ All approaches listed here are valid choices unless marked otherwise.
  "Elm Review"
 [elm-review-no-missing-type-constructor]:
  https://package.elm-lang.org/packages/Arkham/elm-review-no-missing-type-constructor/latest/
- "No Missing Type Constructor rule for Elm Review
+ "No Missing Type Constructor rule for Elm Review"
 [bitwise-and-case]:
  https://exercism.org/tracks/elm/exercises/allergies/approaches/bitwise-and-case
  "Approach: Bitwise and case expression"