Is there a plugin index (or similar?)

I’m gonna out myself as a doofus here, but I can’t for the life of me find out how to get the triple-dots-expand-to-a-little-popup feature.

I’ve spent an embarrassing amount of time scouring my search engine, discourse plugins, the discourse forum, About - Discussions on, and FAQ - Discussions on, Python Discourse Quick Start, and even searched here for help.

The helpful formatting buttons up above have other features (like [spoiler]) but not the [...] one (I’d use the real thing for demonstration, but… [gestures around])

Is there any ways to get a list of the plugins installed on this instance? I could poke at that to find out what’s possible to do, including the [...] (but maybe there’s others I could benefit from?). Or maybe we can list them on the FAQ/About/Welcome page?

1 Like

Are you talking about [1]? That’s a caret and square brackets[2]–confusingly, it renders differently in the preview.

  1. this thing ↩︎

  2. ^[example text] ↩︎

1 Like

The right search keyword is “footnotes”. Yes, I was confused by this at first too.

1 Like



(this space left intentionally blank as to not vioate the code of conduct with my exact thoughts after reading this)

  1. testing ↩︎


Ok, so back on topic… :face_exhaling:

How do we expect people know this? Can it be included somewhere? (Obviously now if you search “ellipses” you’ll hopefully find this thread).

Again, I’ve already made a fool of myself. What can we do so that others don’t suffer my fate?

Well yeah, what about an inline popup doesn’t scream “footnote” to you? :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Have this topic? :wink:

What formatting is supported is covered by Supported formatting in posts (markdown, BBCode, and HTML) - users - Discourse Meta .

Render it as a footnote, not as a clickable popup. I don’t know if Discourse has an option to do this, or if it’s something that could be added, but the current rendering is awful, IMO. Apart from anything else, you can’t quote something in a footnote in a reply.


Maybe enable this Discourse plugin to add a button for inserting a footnote in the Web UI.

It does.

That link leads to this one which shows footnotes the same way the preview does.

Which only solidifies my “no, no, that’s not the feature you want”

Ah that link is EXACTLY what I’ve been looking for!

Bless you :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

See also:

1 Like

So the “display footnotes inline” admin setting needs to be set to false? Which I guess is a site-wide setting, and hence we need to persuade the site admins to switch.

FWIW, I vote in favour of switching.


It seems like users should be able to decide on the flavor of footnotes. E.g. [^1] style would result in canonical footnotes and ^[...] would result in inline.

This is a test of [^1] [1]

  1. Here is a footnote ↩︎

I’d also be in favour of this, the footnote behaviour is very unintuitive. @admins is this something we’d be able to test, please?


There’s 3 possibilities:

  1. Person writing the post gets to decide, two different syntaxes.
  2. Person reading the post gets to decide, user setting.
  3. It’s a site configuration.

It appears (3) is the option that’s actually available to us right now. If someone wanted to get a change to Discourse, or a plugin, then I’d be happy with (2) as well. I don’t think I’d like (1), because of the “can’t quote a popup” problem I mentioned. But I imagine that’s even less likely to be available than (2).

I don’t have a horse in this race, I’ve seen both styles of footnote rendering online and both have advantages and disadvantages. The advantage of the current style is that reading the footnote doesn’t cause scroll jumps out of context.

Whenever a global change like this is made, you have to consider the people content with the current behavior. It might be a sizeable group, and quite possibly the majority. You’re not hearing from them simply because they are silent: they are content with things as they stand right now.

If you feel strongly about changing this, we can run a poll with users and see what they prefer.

1 Like

That’s a good point. And furthermore, it’s easy to be aware of problems with the current approach, but not of things you wouldn’t like about the alternative. I hadn’t considered the scrolling issue.

A user configurable option would be better, but I don’t believe that’s available…

I really like the feature of being able to include a “parenthetical” note inline. XKCD (particularly in “What If”) does this with hover text - see for example Dropping a Mountain where all the images use titles in this way - and the current feature [1] serves that purpose very well. However, it doesn’t have to be called “footnotes” and I honestly think that that’s a poor name for them in this state :slight_smile: If people want footnotes to be, well, footnotes, would it be possible to switch that option but to then have some OTHER notation that gets rendered as “click the three dots to show this text”?

  1. with the current configuration ↩︎