openpgp, buffered-reader, ffi: Fix documentation warnings.

  - Fix unmatched references.

6 files changed, 9 insertions, 9 deletions

diff --git a/buffered-reader/src/lib.rs b/buffered-reader/src/lib.rs
index 92cfcc66..7c5ec322 100644
--- a/buffered-reader/src/lib.rs
+++ b/buffered-reader/src/lib.rs
@@ -881,7 +881,7 @@ pub trait BufferedReader<C> : io::Read + fmt::Debug + fmt::Display {
 /// impl <T: BufferedReader> std::io::Read for T { ... }
 /// ```
 ///
-/// but, alas, Rust doesn't like that ("error[E0119]: conflicting
+/// but, alas, Rust doesn't like that ("error\[E0119\]: conflicting
 /// implementations of trait `std::io::Read` for type `&mut _`").
 pub fn buffered_reader_generic_read_impl<T: BufferedReader<C>, C>
         (bio: &mut T, buf: &mut [u8]) -> Result<usize, io::Error> {
diff --git a/ffi/src/net.rs b/ffi/src/net.rs
index f40de413..52fc7982 100644
--- a/ffi/src/net.rs
+++ b/ffi/src/net.rs
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
 //!
 //! [SKS keyserver]: https://www.sks-keyservers.net/overview-of-pools.php#pool_hkps
 //!
-//! ```c, no-run
+//! ```c
 //! #include <sequoia.h>
 //!
 //! sq_context_t ctx;
diff --git a/openpgp/src/armor.rs b/openpgp/src/armor.rs
index 812169c3..b3692154 100644
--- a/openpgp/src/armor.rs
+++ b/openpgp/src/armor.rs
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ impl Kind {
     /// This does not include any trailing newline.  It is simply the
     /// length of:
     ///
-    /// ```norun
+    /// ```text
     /// -----BEGIN PGP BLUB -----
     /// ```
     fn header_len(&self) -> usize {
diff --git a/openpgp/src/cert/mod.rs b/openpgp/src/cert/mod.rs
index 7e532b64..4d2747b0 100644
--- a/openpgp/src/cert/mod.rs
+++ b/openpgp/src/cert/mod.rs
@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ type UnknownBundles = ComponentBundles<Unknown>;
 /// create a direct key signature with this information.
 ///
 /// [Section 5.2.3.3]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4880#section-5.2.3.3
-/// [WKD] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-koch-openpgp-webkey-service-09#section-5
+/// [WKD]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-koch-openpgp-webkey-service-09#section-5
 /// [without any User ID packets]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-openpgp-rfc4880bis-09#section-11.1
 ///
 /// # Algorithm Preferences
@@ -2237,7 +2237,7 @@ impl Cert {
     /// [`ValidCert`]: cert/struct.ValidCert.html
     /// [`ValidateAmalgamation`]: cert/amalgamation/trait.ValidateAmalgamation.html
     /// [`ValidCert::alive`]: cert/struct.ValidCert.html#method.alive
-    /// [`ValidCert::revocation_status`]: cert/struct.ValidCert.html#method.revocation_status
+    /// [`ValidCert::revoked`]: cert/struct.ValidCert.html#method.revoked
     ///
     /// # Examples
     ///
diff --git a/openpgp/src/packet/signature/subpacket.rs b/openpgp/src/packet/signature/subpacket.rs
index 0e8acb79..b37d2a35 100644
--- a/openpgp/src/packet/signature/subpacket.rs
+++ b/openpgp/src/packet/signature/subpacket.rs
@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ pub enum SubpacketTag {
     IssuerFingerprint,
     /// Preferred AEAD Algorithms.
     PreferredAEADAlgorithms,
-    /// Intended Recipient Fingerprint [proposed].
+    /// Intended Recipient Fingerprint (proposed).
     IntendedRecipient,
     /// Reserved subpacket tag.
     Reserved(u8),
@@ -739,7 +739,7 @@ pub enum SubpacketValue {
     IssuerFingerprint(Fingerprint),
     /// Preferred AEAD Algorithms.
     PreferredAEADAlgorithms(Vec<AEADAlgorithm>),
-    /// Intended Recipient Fingerprint [proposed].
+    /// Intended Recipient Fingerprint (proposed).
     IntendedRecipient(Fingerprint),
 
     /// This marks this enum as non-exhaustive.  Do not use this
diff --git a/openpgp/src/policy.rs b/openpgp/src/policy.rs
index 550b68c0..259099d2 100644
--- a/openpgp/src/policy.rs
+++ b/openpgp/src/policy.rs
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
 //! considered weak (e.g. SHA-1).  When dealing with data from an
 //! untrusted source, for instance, callers will often prefer to
 //! ignore signatures that rely on these algorithms even though [RFC
-//! 4880] says that "[i]mplementations MUST implement SHA-1."  When
+//! 4880] says that "\[i\]mplementations MUST implement SHA-1."  When
 //! trying to decrypt old archives, however, users probably don't want
 //! to ignore keys using MD5, even though [RFC 4880] deprecates MD5.
 //!
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 //! `StandardPolicy`'s parameters.
 //!
 //! When implementing the `Policy` trait, it is *essential* that the
-//! functions are [idempotent].  That is, if the same `Policy` is used
+//! functions are [pure].  That is, if the same `Policy` is used
 //! to determine whether a given `Signature` is valid, it must always
 //! return the same value.
 //!