Potentially incorrect links at the bottom of the commonJs doc

[dario-piotrowicz]

Affected URL(s)

https://nodejs.org/docs/latest/api/modules.html#the-module-object_1, https://nodejs.org/docs/latest/api/modules.html#source-map-v3-support

Description of the problem

There are some links at the bottom of the commonjs doc that seem out of place to me:

In the md file they are prefixed by this comment:

node/doc/api/modules.md

Line 1257 in 1d8593e

<!-- Anchors to make sure old links find a target -->

which does leads me to believe that these should not be rendered in the page

About the comment

The same comment can be found in other parts of the codebase, the anchors/elements below such comment are indeed not rendered:

node/doc/api/esm.md

Lines 117 to 119 in 1d8593e

	<!-- Anchors to make sure old links find a target -->
	<i id="esm_package_json_type_field"></i><i id="esm_package_scope_and_file_extensions"></i><i id="esm_input_type_flag"></i>

node/doc/api/esm.md

Lines 142 to 144 in 1d8593e

	<!-- Anchors to make sure old links find a target -->
	<i id="esm_package_entry_points"></i><i id="esm_main_entry_point_export"></i><i id="esm_subpath_exports"></i><i id="esm_package_exports_fallbacks"></i><i id="esm_exports_sugar"></i><i id="esm_conditional_exports"></i><i id="esm_nested_conditions"></i><i id="esm_self_referencing_a_package_using_its_name"></i><i id="esm_internal_package_imports"></i><i id="esm_dual_commonjs_es_module_packages"></i><i id="esm_dual_package_hazard"></i><i id="esm_writing_dual_packages_while_avoiding_or_minimizing_hazards"></i><i id="esm_approach_1_use_an_es_module_wrapper"></i><i id="esm_approach_2_isolate_state"></i>

node/doc/api/module.md

Lines 1617 to 1619 in 1d8593e

	<!-- Anchors to make sure old links find a target -->
	<a id="module_module_findsourcemap_path_error"></a>

cc @aduh95

[dario-piotrowicz]

PS: additionally the new SourceMap(payload) and sourceMap.findEntry(lineNumber, columnNumber) links are actually broken

[aduh95]

In the md file they are prefixed by [a] comment which does leads me to believe that these should not be rendered in the page

The goal is definitely for those to be rendered, it would be quite useless to keep the anchors without showing the link to the actual docs.
The goal is for folks who would follow a link dating from the time those docs where on this page, they get a link to the new emplacement in the docs – of course, it'd be more effective if said link was not broken, I've opened #57098 to address this

[dario-piotrowicz]

it would be quite useless to keep the anchors without showing the link to the actual docs.

I thought the point of these were to have anchors with outdated id in this doc, so that old urls could still point to valid locations (for renamed sections etc...), so not something to be displayed, but just there so that urls with fragments would indeed find valid locations to scroll to

I might be misunderstanding what these are for

[aduh95]

I thought the point of these were to have anchors with outdated id in this doc, so that old urls could still point to valid locations […] so that urls with fragments would indeed find valid locations to scroll to

That's exactly it

so not something to be displayed

Well you're wrong on that point, it would be rather useless to have the user scroll to the end of the document if there's nothing there.

[dario-piotrowicz]

Well you're wrong on that point, it would be rather useless to have the user scroll to the end of the document if there's nothing there.

I see, sorry that's totally my bad, I've just only now noticed that they were linking to a different page! (I didn't notice that the current page is modules but that they link to module 🤦)

Ok then makes sense to me (I thought they were links to a location on the same page!)

Sorry for the dumb mistake 🙂 🙇