Referred to related things.

diff --git a/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn b/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn
index 2832e37aad36c85e0c696bce62cb124791ad8aab..b8c5b8f20157812de4c4dddf7de273693a81b429 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ I like the idea of [[tips/integrated_issue_tracking_with_ikiwiki]], and I do so
 >
 >> I thought about this briefly, and got about that far.. glad you got
 >> further. :-) --[[Joey]]
+
+>> Or, one could also refer to the language of [[!wikipedia description logics]]: their formulas actually define classes of objects through quantified relations to other classes. --Ivan Z.
 > 
 > Another option would be go with a more functional syntax.  The concept here would
 > be to allow a pagespec to appear in a 'pagespec function' anywhere a page can.  e.g.
@@ -67,13 +69,15 @@ I like the idea of [[tips/integrated_issue_tracking_with_ikiwiki]], and I do so
 
 >>>> Yeah, guess that'd work. :-)
 
-> One quick further thought.  All the above discussion assumes that 'dependency' is the
+> <a id="another_kind_of_links" />One quick further thought.  All the above discussion assumes that 'dependency' is the
 > same as 'links to', which is not really true.  For example, you'd like to be able to say
 > "This bug does not depend upon [ [ link to other bug ] ]" and not have a dependency.
 > Without having different types of links, I don't see how this would be possible.
 >
 > -- [[Will]]
 
+>> I saw that this issue is targeted at by the work on [[structured page data#another_kind_of_links]]. --Ivan Z.
+
 Okie - I've had a quick attempt at this.  Initial patch attached.  This one doesn't quite work.
 And there is still a lot of debugging stuff in there.