Skip to content

[No QA] Update Pay-an-invoice.md#71924

Merged
clarajones-expensify merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
clarajones-expensify-patch-2
Oct 14, 2025
Merged

[No QA] Update Pay-an-invoice.md#71924
clarajones-expensify merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
clarajones-expensify-patch-2

Conversation

@clarajones-expensify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

added a "?" at the end of one of the FAQ questions that was missing it

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(themeColors.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

added a "?" at the end of one of the FAQ questions that was missing it
@clarajones-expensify clarajones-expensify self-assigned this Oct 6, 2025
@clarajones-expensify clarajones-expensify requested a review from a team as a code owner October 6, 2025 18:37
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Oct 6, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Concierge reviewer checklist:

  • I have verified the accuracy of the article
    • The article is within a hub that makes sense, and the navigation is correct
    • All processes, screenshots, and examples align with current product behavior.
    • All links within the doc have been verified for correct destination and functionality.
  • I have verified the readability of the article
    • The article's language is clear, concise, and free of jargon.
    • The grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct.
    • The article contains at least one image, or that an image is not necessary
  • I have verified the formatting of the article
    • The article has consistent formatting (headings, bullet points, etc.) with other HelpDot articles and that aligns with the HelpDot formatting standards.
    • The article has proper text spacing and breaks for readability.
  • I have verified the article has the appropriate tone and style
    • The article's tone is professional, friendly, and suitable for the target audience.
    • The article's tone, terminology, and voice are consistent throughout.
  • I have verified the overall quality of the article
    • The article is not missing any information, nor does it contain redundant information.
    • The article fully addresses user needs.
  • I have verified that all requested improvements have been addressed

For more detailed instructions on completing this checklist, see How do I review a HelpDot PR as a Concierge Team member?

cc @jliexpensify

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from jliexpensify October 6, 2025 18:37
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Oct 6, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@jliexpensify Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team October 6, 2025 18:37
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 6, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR makes a minor but important punctuation correction to the Pay an Invoice documentation by adding a missing question mark to an FAQ question. While the change is minimal, it demonstrates attention to detail and improves consistency in the documentation.

Scores Summary

  • Readability: 9/10 - The correction improves grammatical correctness and maintains clear, accessible language throughout the document
  • AI Readiness: 8/10 - The document has good structure with descriptive headings, proper YAML metadata, and clear context, though some areas could benefit from more specific feature naming
  • Style Compliance: 9/10 - Strong adherence to Expensify documentation standards with proper FAQ structure, consistent terminology, and appropriate formatting

Key Findings

  • Positive Aspects:

    • Clean, well-structured document with logical flow from introduction to step-by-step instructions to FAQ
    • Proper use of Jekyll includes for responsive design elements
    • Clear differentiation between desktop and mobile instructions
    • Comprehensive FAQ section addressing common user concerns
    • Good use of visual elements (screenshot reference)
  • Minor Areas for Improvement:

    • Some FAQ answers could be more concise (particularly the 'Who can send an invoice?' response)
    • The document could benefit from more specific feature names in headings for better AI discoverability

Recommendations

  • Immediate: The punctuation fix in this PR is correct and should be merged
  • Future Considerations:
    • Consider breaking up longer FAQ responses into more digestible chunks
    • Add more specific feature terminology in headings where appropriate
    • Ensure all FAQ questions follow the same grammatical pattern (question format with proper punctuation)

Files Reviewed

  • /docs/articles/new-expensify/wallet-and-payments/Pay-an-invoice.md - Minor punctuation fix correctly applied, overall high quality documentation

This review found the documentation to be well-written and properly structured. The single change made improves consistency and grammatical correctness.

Expensify invoicing is designed to cater to both business-to-customer (B2C) and business-to-business (B2B) needs, making it a versatile tool for businesses of all sizes.

**Can I pay an invoice outside of Expensify**
**Can I pay an invoice outside of Expensify?**

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good fix! Adding the question mark correctly follows FAQ formatting standards. This ensures consistent punctuation across all FAQ questions.

@github-actions github-actions Bot changed the title Update Pay-an-invoice.md [No QA] Update Pay-an-invoice.md Oct 6, 2025
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Oct 6, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://66970d7a.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

@jliexpensify jliexpensify left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@clarajones-expensify clarajones-expensify merged commit 0fedbcd into main Oct 14, 2025
10 of 11 checks passed
@clarajones-expensify clarajones-expensify deleted the clarajones-expensify-patch-2 branch October 14, 2025 17:13
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot added the Emergency label Oct 14, 2025
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Oct 14, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@clarajones-expensify looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@clarajones-expensify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

App pr checklist was added in the original comment

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/clarajones-expensify in version: 9.2.31-0 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.2.31-2 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants