Hi Alexander,

Feel free to add comments below each FAQ and those comments are considered by our Support team and they edit the FAQs from time to time.

It’s a bit annoying though as some only require an auto-indent. 10% of articles actually. I’m guessing the support team won’t attempt this themselves so it’d be good if MadScientist or some high rank could do so.

Gurudutt wrote:

Hi Alexander,

Feel free to add comments below each FAQ and those comments are considered by our Support team and they edit the FAQs from time to time.

Gurudutt, there are many old comments below FAQ, which are yet to be corrected … search also in the wiki by these tags ….

fix_code_formatting x 24
fix_formatting x 13
fix_code x 12
fix_attachment x 7
fix_url x 2
fix_typo x 1
code_fix_formatting x 1
fix_duplicate x 1

Gurudutt: I added some “fix formatting” tags, too…

chetankjain: Why the underscore? Did you run out of spaces? ;-)

tobias: someone started, i continued the same convention :) ..
the admins can directly rename this tag in one go ;)

To answer the OPs question; the FAQs are edited by the Qt Support team. And each night we get a fresh copy of their FAQ database. The actual source is in the customer support systems we use.

I’ve cleaned up some of them, removed the “please fix this / now it’s fixed” comments and removed the tag. But more work is needed there, clearly.

chetankjain wrote:

fix_formatting x 13

Nice to know the Qt Support team try to fix them. But letting a Mad Scientist do it could reduce the load I think.

In fact, why not also allow Mad Scientists to add FAQ entries.

Or, even more radical: what about eliminating the redundance between FAQ and Wiki, leaving the FAQ just for legal and business questions?

On FN, some Wiki entries are protected from editing and serve as “FAQ”…

tamhanna wrote:

In fact, why not also allow Mad Scientists to add FAQ entries.

tamhanna wrote:

On FN, some Wiki entries are protected from editing and serve as “FAQ”…

xsacha wrote:

tamhanna wrote:

On FN, some Wiki entries are protected from editing and serve as “FAQ”…

Well that’s really what these are. Except in their own special section with their own tags and lists.

Doesn’t look like that to me – the GUI for the FAQ and the Wiki is completely different.

Only because you aren’t allowed to add/remove/edit FAQ entries. The GUI looks like the blog GUI. It’s fine.

xsacha wrote:

Only because you aren’t allowed to add/remove/edit FAQ entries. The GUI looks like the blog GUI. It’s fine.

I didn’t say that the GUI doesn’t look fine.

However, integrating it into the Wiki would mean that there is one less place to search…

No, I said it looks fine.

Why would you search the wiki if you had a problem and looking for frequently asked questions? You wouldn’t. Why would you search frequently asked questions if looking for information about something to do with Qt (you know what I mean)? You wouldn’t.

I see them as different things anyway. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to edit FAQ (bringing this on-topic). Some of us should have that ability so we can keep it up to date with correct, indented code.

Hi xsacha,
to be honest: many of the issues I saw in the FAQ, I would look for in the Wiki rather.

IMHO, an FAQ is for legal stuff whereas a Wiki is for dev stuff. But this is just my perception…

xsacha: Marius explained that the FAQ is generated regularly from the support database. Since even mad scientist will most likely not get access to the support database (which most likely contains customer data and whatnot) it makes no sense for me (as a mad scientist) to waste time fixing up the articles in the FAQ section of this site. The next import will just undo all the work.

Having said this: It is unfortunate that the typos were not yet fixed by the support team. It does look unprofessional to me to have typos on the officially maintained parts of the site.