I think this is what REL and REV attributes of anchors and BASE tags are for.
Anchors in hypertext deserve a PERTINCENCE attribute to indicate their relevance to the discourse in which they appear. An anchor with HREF may have its PERTINENCE understood as the relevance of the URL referenced to the discourse. By default this is treated as CRUCIAL to an HREF, in that making the reader notice (eg by displaying them in another colour) that it's an anchor is about the only response guaranteed. More generally, what I would like to see included in the anchor is some statement of why the text is so anchored. By default, non-HREF anchors are not displayed specially; but it is within the understanding of Markup to regard the anchor, arrival at which has brought the current discourse to the fore, as worthy of `pointing out', preferrably in some way which persists as you read what follows and precedes it - eg some display emphasis of the text regardless of the scrolled position - colour, font, boxing or whatever.
Other PERTINENCEs, described in terms of what they mean when applied to an HREF:
While these explanations describe the relationship of an HREF to its anchored text, the same PERTINENCEs could be used in a NAMEd anchor to indicate the nature of the anchored text in terms of why one might wish to make reference to it.Transcribed: Eddy/1996/Dec/15.