Aspnetcore.docs: Link to Use, Run, and Map has changed

[serpent5]

This topic links to _Use, Run, and Map_ in the Middlware topic, but that section was renamed a while back to _Branch the middleware pipeline_, so it doesn't resolve correctly.

I can fix this along with #18785.

---

Document Details

⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for docs.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.

• ID: c0cbb094-29e9-740a-9fd6-db372641d753
• Version Independent ID: 52d8efc9-a336-71d9-6d90-98173cbf6bf4
• Content: Health checks in ASP.NET Core
• Content Source: aspnetcore/host-and-deploy/health-checks.md
• Product: aspnet-core
• Technology: aspnetcore-hostdeploy
• GitHub Login: @Rick-Anderson
• Microsoft Alias: riande

[guardrex]

This is happening repeatedly (for topics that I wrote) because I don't use named anchors because they don't conform to HTML5 (and I have an accessibility concern for link lists generated from a page).

• The build system is either failing to find broken bookmarks, or authors aren't checking the build report.
• Authors aren't performing a find-'n-replace when changing section headings.

I've mistakenly done both of those occasionally! 🙈 However, I think I'm on spec.

Generally, the guidance is _not_ to use named hyperlinks for bookmarking ...

Adding explicit anchor links using the HTML tag isn't required or recommended, except in hub and landing pages. Instead, use the auto-generated bookmarks as described in bookmark links.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/contribute/how-to-write-links#explicit-anchor-links

The bookmark links guidance is to use the HTML5-friendly (possibly accessibility-friendly) automatic id of the section heading.

[guardrex]

@serpent5 ... I marked this in-progress for you for your PR. Thanks _again_ for everything ur doing to help out around here!

UPDATE Oh ... I forgot that we weren't supposed to do community "assignments." I wish it was ok, but I don't think the Foundation cares for that under the license language.

[serpent5]

Thanks @guardrex. I keep a list of issues I've said I'll look at as bookmarks in the browser, but, yeah, it would be awesome if things could be assigned like that. I can see why it's not OK to assign issues to a rando on the Internet, though. 😆

Thanks for the information about the links - I hadn't seen that guidance before. I'll be sure to do the find-'n-replace thing, too. It looks like I actually broke this one myself, when I did some work in that topic a few months back.

Also thanks to you for a lot of indirect help in the docs in general. I often look at work you've done when I'm trying to decide how best to do something and I _may_ have even borrowed some wording here or there... 😇

[guardrex]

We can't assign because the contributions are on a _volunteer_ basis. Using GH's issue assignment feature could be misconstrued as a literal assignment. It also probably places too much pressure on a community member. I was in the same situation before Aquent/MS picked me up. I worked many issues over several months unassigned on a verbal volunteer handshake 🤝 that I'd take care of them.

[Rick-Anderson]

WE could make a Serpent5-FYI label to point out issues.

[serpent5]

It also probably places too much pressure on a community member.

Sure, that does make sense. I didn't really think about the pressure side of it...

Can either of you help me with something, please? In http-modules.md, there's this:

* [Pipeline branching](xref:fundamentals/middleware/index#use-run-and-map)...

That topic isn't versioned at all, so changing the # there would break it for 2.1, at least. How should I handle that? All I can come up with is using a moniker for the bullet with < 3.0 and >= 3.0 versions to make sure it's the correct link.

[serpent5]

WE could make a Serpent5-FYI label to point out issues.

Ooh a label just for me. ✨

I'm OK with the bookmark system for now, really. I went through everything I was mentioned in recently and built a list from that. Now I just drag-drop it onto a bookmarks folder and it's fine. Although Good serpent5 issue or serpent5 wanted both have a nice ring to them 🔔 .

[Rick-Anderson]

If there's only one place that differs, use

::: moniker range=">= aspnetcore-3.0"

// 3.1 stuff
::: moniker-end
::: moniker range="< aspnetcore-3.0"
/// 2.x
::: moniker-end

You don't need full file versioning

I also like to drop in
<a name="myH2"></a>

and use that. In 5.x I'll use
<a name="myH2-5"></a>

[serpent5]

Ok, thanks! I'll go with the monikers for now. It looks like the guidance Luke pointed out doesn't like those explicit anchors as much, so I'll _try_ and keep everyone happy.

[guardrex]

I'll try and keep everyone happy

Vegas odds have you at 100-1 ......... _against!_ 😁

[Rick-Anderson]

I created label:GII