From a28825da29a586a42cd0db0d872a5f9792d10e52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@ebb.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 14:23:29 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Create a few id tags for linking directly to FAQs.

---
 .../static/copyleft-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html        | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/www/conservancy/static/copyleft-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html b/www/conservancy/static/copyleft-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html
index 8e3a7cad..85360322 100644
--- a/www/conservancy/static/copyleft-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html
+++ b/www/conservancy/static/copyleft-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
   its <a href="/linux-compliance/about.html">GPL Compliance
   Project for Linux Developers</a>.</dd>
 
-  <dt>Is this the Great Test Case of Combined / Derivative Works?</dt>
+  <dt id="combined-and-derivative-works">Is this the Great Test Case of Combined / Derivative Works?</dt>
 
   <dd>This case is specifically regarding a combined work that VMware
   allegedly created by combining their own code (&ldquo;vmkernel&rdquo;) with
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@
   derivative works that are covered by GPL that no single case could possibly
   include all such issues. </dd>
 
-  <dt>Why must you file a lawsuit?  Isn't there any other way to convince
+  <dt id="why-lawsuit">Why must you file a lawsuit?  Isn't there any other way to convince
     VMware to comply with GPL?</dt>
 
   <dd><p>Neither Conservancy nor Christoph takes this action lightly nor without