Guide: How to correctly check for available Notepad++ updates using your web browser:

guy038

Ah, personally, I was not really thinking about adding a new section, to the 8 existing sections of our Community ( which fill up the screen, anyway ! ) but, rather, about a new post, in the FAQ section, which would only contain links, of our forum, to pertinents posts which will gather important notions of main subjects, related to Notepad++ or its plugins.

In other words, a list of links with a short description of each of them, which would redirect to summary posts on a specific topic, created by anyone of us.

Let’s wait a little while, until a correct idea, concerning these future guides, emerges !

Best Regards,

guy038

pnedev

Hello guys,

I would suggest the following:

Rename FAQ section to FAQ and Guides .
In FAQ section revise the current topics to remove all that are no longer related (or are obsolete) and make them as concise and ‘to-the-point’ as possible WITHOUT ANY LINKS to other posts. This section needs to be the “golden source of information” on a given topic and all the relevant issues should link to the topic here and not the other way around. The topics may link each other however. Also remove the unnecessary FAQ Desk: from the name of each topic.
Don’t hurry with creating a new topic here. Only when enough duplicating (or similar) help requests have been made to justify it (that would mean the subject is commonly misunderstood and difficult for the user).

For example some “good” (IMO) topics would be
How to check if my Notepad++ is 32-bit or 64-bit,
Plugin not compatible with current Notepad++ version,
Portable vs. installed Notepad++
etc…

As to the new ‘theme-of-the-day’ (recent missing plugins and failed plugins installation problems) we might create topic named Troubleshooting plugin installation problems and list there possible causes of plugin problems and how to overcome them.

One thing that is still unclear to me is “Shall all Notepad++ versions be supported?”. I mean from the FAQ point of view.
Perhaps the guides in FAQ section should address and be made only for the most recent Notepad++ versions and for the global topics of course. If we try to make version-specific guides cover ALL Notepad++ versions it will only make them unclean. So each guide should state the Notepad++ version it is relevant to or state that it is globally applicable.

BR

PeterJones

I think widening the purview of the FAQ section to FAQ and GUIDES is a good idea.

I also think that @guy038 should lobby with @donho for the other FAQ contributors to be given FAQ-editing rights after the 3-minute timeout – right now, only @guy038 can go back and edit a FAQ after the timeout, and that’s a rather unfair burden to place on him. (I tried including that request in my email to @donho last week, but his mail server thinks that my email server sends too much spam, and won’t let my mails through :-(. That’s a problem with hosting my mail on a major web co-location/webhost provider.)

guy038

Hi, @pnedev, @meta-chuh, @peterjones, @alan-kilborn, @ekopalypse, @dinkumoil, @terry-r,

@pnedev, I totally agree to your To-Do list ! This scheme seems quite coherent, indeed ! Of course, I do note that, what is exposed in point 2., is just the opposite to what I was thinking about ! But, upon reflection, your way is the right one : when people enters the future FAQ and Guides section, one would enter a reserved area of reference topics about the most important N++ subjects, with possible links to other FAQ and Guides topics, only !

However, @pnedev, what’s about the Where to find REGEX documentation topic ? It contains lot of links, all external to our forum… which are… just why that topic was created !!

As @peterjones mentioned it, in order to correctly do this documentation work, each of you need to be able :

To re-open and modify any post, at any time
To access the future FAQ and Guides section, and manage any post, inside

So, I’ll going to e-mail @don-ho and propose him to give you identical rights, on our forum !

As you said, we could suppress the FAQ Desk: header. I also think that point 3. is pertinent. In France, we use the expression “To hurry slowly” to express your idea ;-)) On the other hand, I agree with your different topic titles

Finally, regarding the opportunity to build this documentation for all N++ versions, I think, like you, that it should aim recent N++ versions, only ! BTW, mentioning to which N++ versions, any guide refers, is a sensible idea !

So, let’s wait till the @don-ho reply. Then, guys, we’ll have a lot of work ahead of us ;-))

Best Regards,

guy038

P.S. :

BTW, I personally think that the @meta-chuch polite formulation ( Welcome to the Notepad++ Community ) should start or be added to all topics of the future FAQ and Guides section. Why didn’t I think of this welcome formula myself ?!

pnedev

Hi @guy038 ,

Thanks for your prompt reply. Punctual as always!

However, @pnedev, what’s about the Where to find REGEX documentation topic ?

There will be exceptions of course and this topic is a good example of such. REGEX type of user questions are indeed quite common (and you’ve been addressing those brilliantly as far as I can remember) and this FAQ topic is exactly what’s needed for that particular area of interest.
What I meant was to limit the links where possible and especially to avoid ANY links to other sections in Notepad++ Community forum.
But you already got that correctly.

BR

Meta Chuh

hi to all and thanks for driving this discussion.
i have the feeling that the result can be very, very productive.

@pnedev:

Rename FAQ section to FAQ and Guides.

i believe that separated categories for faqs and guides, will be easier to read (if we will be permitted to do so):

FAQ - a very clean and short faq area, basic information only.
Guides - with one guide per topic.
every guide shall be written on a single topic page, with as few as possible links (links only to be used as complementary information).
guides that are of repeated value will be pinned.

an extra category for guides seems like a more structured choice, if we are permitted.

remove the unnecessary FAQ Desk: from the name of each topic.

yes and no.
yes because: prefixes like FAQ Desk: are a double titling, as the visitor is already in the faq section, but only if he specifically entered our community page.

on the other hand, prefixes like that are useful tags for external search engines.
for guides it’s even more recommend to keep a prefix like Guide: or similar, as there will be more of them than faqs, and it will be much easier to attract external people googling for a guide or solution.

(as we know, most “non community” users search at google, some of them fail with the results they find, they then discover the notepad++ community page, and their first post looks something like: “this is sh…, i’ve tried everything and nothing works” 😉)

Don’t hurry with creating a new topic here. Only when enough duplicating (or similar) help requests have been made to justify it (that would mean the subject is commonly misunderstood and difficult for the user).

yes, we can always create a guide at general discussion, and if it turns out to be of value we can move it, or ask to get it moved, to the Guides category later.

So each guide should state the Notepad++ version it is relevant to or state that it is globally applicable.

yes, this is a must have. even if it is intended to be globally applicable, it will probably not always be future proof, and i would suggest that every guide contains a note, with the notepad++ version, that was used to build this guide.

@guy038:

In France, we use the expression “To hurry slowly” to express your idea ;-))

yes, this translates to something like:
to build a castle you have to set one brick after the other.

and i also prefer to set a small brick every month, than to wake up and realise, that we have successfully built an entire wall in the middle of a highway. 😉

BTW, I personally think that the @meta-chuch polite formulation ( Welcome to the Notepad++ Community ) should start or be added to all topics of the future FAQ and Guides section. Why didn’t I think of this welcome formula myself ?!

yes it’s a nice, round circle that comes together at the beginning and the present.
@donho created it, @glennfromiowa reintroduced it, me and @PeterJones picked it up, and now we will maintain it. 👍
this welcome is also proven to be helpful on occasions, when a first time visitor is under higher tension.

i like to see our ideas evolve, and grow together, like the roots of the forest of pandora (avatar 2009).

…and once we are euphorically satisfied with the (maybe small, maybe big) concept, we will step on the porches to heaven and ask for permission to do so … 😁

with very best regards to all
metachuh

pnedev

@Meta-Chuh said:

i believe that separated categories for faqs and guides, will be easier to read …

Well, that’s OK too although the reference topics will be then split in two places. I can’t say which is better.

… on the other hand, prefixes like that are useful tags for external search engines …

That’s a very good point indeed. And a good reason to leave the topic “header”. But let’s at least reduce it to FAQ .

Thanks and BR

PeterJones

@pnedev said:

Well, that’s OK too although the reference topics will be then split in two places. I can’t say which is better.

I’d personally prefer all in one place

… on the other hand, prefixes like that are useful tags for external search engines …
That’s a very good point indeed. And a good reason to leave the topic “header”. But let’s at least reduce it to FAQ .

Yeah, I would vote for “FAQ” rather than “FAQ Desk” too. And I’m the one who started the “FAQ Desk” nomenclature. I originally thought it was a good idea, especially when there was no FAQ category, to indicate that this was the answer to the FAQ (“you’ve been sent to the FAQ Desk to find the answer to your question…”). But in the intervening time, I’ve liked that nomenclature less.

PeterJones

@PeterJones said in Guide: How to correctly check for available Notepad++ updates using your web browser::

Yeah, I would vote for “FAQ” rather than “FAQ Desk” too. And I’m the one who started the “FAQ Desk” nomenclature. I originally thought it was a good idea, especially when there was no FAQ category, to indicate that this was the answer to the FAQ (“you’ve been sent to the FAQ Desk to find the answer to your question…”). But in the intervening time, I’ve liked that nomenclature less.

And yet, 4.5 years later, I still hadn’t changed those prefixes. But I finally found the elusive Round Tuit™ today, so all the FAQ entries are now listed as “FAQ: …” rather than “FAQ Desk: …”

And while I haven’t renamed the section, I am perfectly happy to put Guide-like entries into the FAQ (and looking back over the entries, many of the historical FAQ entries really are more of a guide than an answer to a single Frequently Asked Question).

dumble dor

This post is deleted!