Anchor link is the correct term. That’s what your developer will know it as too so you’ll all be speaking the same language.
See [Anchor Element](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/a) on the MDN.
Isn't this a "jump to" link? Did they change the name of them? I'm not familiar with any of the terminology you are using, but I could be an old.
I'm not sure if changing the URL/not changing URL means anything to me as a user, if what I'm seeing is the "jump to" interaction happening, that's all i would notice. Is it important to clarify the difference so you can talk internally to your developer team about it?
im not really a dev i just wont leave and keep giving my unasked opinions but ive noticed a lot of websites - specifically wikipedia - will add #text-snippet to the end of the url, and then when you share that url it will open to that part of the page. i know it works on wikipedia because they have pages structured with headers/chapters or whatever, but that would be a super useful thing to be able to, for example, link to an article with "#This Specific Sentence or Phrase" added to the end of the url and then when someone opens the page it goes straight to that part of it. would be a good way to reduce the amount of copy/pasting that happens on reddit and other places too, probably
i realize you are not the president of the internet but idk who else to tell so ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
also "jump to link" makes more sense than "link fragment," "skip link," or "scroll to anchor"
Wikipedia and other places where you see that have directly linkable text snippets tagged with identifiers like id=“text-snippet” and only those parts with an id can be linked with url #text-snippet.
When they get fancy with id generation they can e.g. take a title text and convert it more or less human readable [slug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_URL#Slug).
I've always just said scroll to anchor. But I've also never really cared to semantically name something like this when I can very quickly describe it in a way that makes sense to everybody.
I'd said an 'anchor' or 'anchor link' to many devs, and they understood right away. I believe that language is a shared term.
It can be a valuable thing to bookmark as a user if it's appropriate, as well as share via email/chat instead of "just scroll down 3 screen heights" or something goofy that like. Google may also index that content if it's more popular than the top of the page (again an assumption.)
I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to update the URL to reflect the anchor's ID. I guess you could create an anchor with javascript—if you really didn't want the URL to update to show the ID.
It’s anchor link, although I wouldn’t trust that that term gets understood or used correctly by anyone. Html links are done with ‘a’ element that is officially ’anchor’ but practically never called that in development. Depending on context details of the implementation, the ‘a’ element may not be involved in either end of the navigation action.
Jump link, scroll link, or page-internal-link probably has better chance of being understood.
These have been referred to as "anchor links" in every project where I've used them, regardless of how the url behaves.
Yes. It's an anchor link.
Yes, it IS an anchor link.
Anchor tag if you want to talk to developers and have them understand you.
Depending on the audience I’ve used anchor tag, jump link, scroll link. Link fragment feels like it has the most potential for confusion.
Anchor link is the correct term. That’s what your developer will know it as too so you’ll all be speaking the same language. See [Anchor Element](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/a) on the MDN.
Isn't this a "jump to" link? Did they change the name of them? I'm not familiar with any of the terminology you are using, but I could be an old. I'm not sure if changing the URL/not changing URL means anything to me as a user, if what I'm seeing is the "jump to" interaction happening, that's all i would notice. Is it important to clarify the difference so you can talk internally to your developer team about it?
im not really a dev i just wont leave and keep giving my unasked opinions but ive noticed a lot of websites - specifically wikipedia - will add #text-snippet to the end of the url, and then when you share that url it will open to that part of the page. i know it works on wikipedia because they have pages structured with headers/chapters or whatever, but that would be a super useful thing to be able to, for example, link to an article with "#This Specific Sentence or Phrase" added to the end of the url and then when someone opens the page it goes straight to that part of it. would be a good way to reduce the amount of copy/pasting that happens on reddit and other places too, probably i realize you are not the president of the internet but idk who else to tell so ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ also "jump to link" makes more sense than "link fragment," "skip link," or "scroll to anchor"
Wikipedia and other places where you see that have directly linkable text snippets tagged with identifiers like id=“text-snippet” and only those parts with an id can be linked with url #text-snippet. When they get fancy with id generation they can e.g. take a title text and convert it more or less human readable [slug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_URL#Slug).
I've always just said scroll to anchor. But I've also never really cared to semantically name something like this when I can very quickly describe it in a way that makes sense to everybody.
I'd said an 'anchor' or 'anchor link' to many devs, and they understood right away. I believe that language is a shared term. It can be a valuable thing to bookmark as a user if it's appropriate, as well as share via email/chat instead of "just scroll down 3 screen heights" or something goofy that like. Google may also index that content if it's more popular than the top of the page (again an assumption.) I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to update the URL to reflect the anchor's ID. I guess you could create an anchor with javascript—if you really didn't want the URL to update to show the ID.
Is usually called a "fragment identifier" or an "anchor link" we always call them anchor links because it's just easier.
It’s anchor link, although I wouldn’t trust that that term gets understood or used correctly by anyone. Html links are done with ‘a’ element that is officially ’anchor’ but practically never called that in development. Depending on context details of the implementation, the ‘a’ element may not be involved in either end of the navigation action. Jump link, scroll link, or page-internal-link probably has better chance of being understood.
As others have said, anchor link/tag/element is the correct term, technically. it's why the tag is