For instance, instead of a GUID, ImmenseUnequaledEasteuropeanshepherd
gfycat does this and I've been seeing it used more and more. I figured there was a name for it...
Edit 1: Semi-relevant Reddit Post - Wordlists from gfycat
Edit 2: Do you guys hate the word based url? (GFYCAT)
Related
I'm building an athlete profile database using ACF (Advanced Custom Fields). I have fields for First Name, Last Name, and Full Name. Athletes will be able to enter their first and last names on the front end of the website when they are creating a profile. I don't want them to enter their full name also because that's a bad user experience. But I need the full name on the backend. Is there a way to have the Full Name text field auto-generated by merging the values of First Name and Last Name? I don't want to enter the full name manually. Thanks!
with this kind of thing you are wanting to combine 2 fields into 1 record it may just be easier to ask for the full name in 1 field this is not a bad user experience as much as you may think more people actually find it more annoying needing to put different parts of there name in different boxes.
However if this is what you are wanting to move forward with I did find this which may be of some assistance Wordpress/ACF merging multiple fields value to one
I have created a group project signup form using google form. And there are two blanks where the students have to fill the names of their team members, I have created dropdown lists including all students in the class. But I do not want the student to submit the response with the same name for all team members. Is there any way to restrict the student not to fill the same name? Or is there any way to prevent the students to submit the forms if they try to submit the response with invalid answers?
To make it short, what I want is:
within one response, no same answers are allowed for different questions.
I have tried to search online, but all of them are about how to disallow students to submit duplicate responses.
Thank you.
What you could do is make check boxes with the names of every student in the class. Then all they have to do is select which people are in their group.
Example:
(#) represents the check box.
(#) Student name 1
(#) Student name 2
(#) Student name 3
(#) Student name 4
(#) Student name 5
and so on.....
Then whatever boxes they check off are the ones that are in their group. Because with the check boxes, they can't pick the same person twice. That's because it is only one question, but the student can pick multiple people.
I hope this answers your question, and have a wonderful rest of your day.
In FSCM I am looking to modify the Search view on Add/Update PO page (Main Menu--> Purchasing--> Purchase Orders--> Add/Update POs) to display the Requisition ID associated with the PO in the search results page. The only table I have found that has both PO_ID and REQ_ID is PS_PO_LINE_DISTRIB however unless I use a SELECT DISTINCT clause I will get multiple PO_ID rows when there are more than 1 line on a PO.
Within Purchase Order Inquiry you can see the related Requisition ID's related to a PO by clicking on Document Status link inside the Purchase Order inquiry details page.
I started looking at the PeopleCode within the the Purchase Order Inquiry to see how they are linking the PO to a Requisition and it appears to use work tables with related PeopleCode function libraries, but I wasn't able to figure our how they get linked. I am hoping someone else may know the answer to this. Thank you.
I'm on an old version of PeopleSoft (SCM 8.80, Tools 8.51), so your mileage may vary. I'm assuming you're familiar with App Designer. If not, comment below and I'll add some details about what I'm clicking on.
Find the name of the Add/Update PO component.
Open the PURCHASE_ORDER component in App Designer. Now let's find the name of the search record. Note that there is a different record for the Add Search Record, so if you want to change that too, do all of this for that record as well.
Open the PO_SRCH record, and add the REQ_ID field to it. Make sure you mark the field as a key. You should consider saving your modified PO_SRCH under a new name in case you want to be able to revert to vanilla PeopleSoft. If you do, change the Search Record in the component to your new record name.
We can see that PO_SRCH is a view. So let's modify the view to pull in REQ_ID from PO_LINE_DISTRIB. As you mentioned above, there doesn't appear to be another table with both PO_ID and REQ_ID, so you'll have to do a SELECT DISTINCT.
We should do a LEFT OUTER JOIN instead of a standard join because if you do a standard join and you enter a purchase order with no lines and save it, then you'll never be able to retrieve that purchase order in this window. Since REQ_ID is a key field, we can't have a null, so we have to do the CASE.
One odd thing that I ran into here was building the view now gave me an error about selecting fewer columns in the SQL than I had in my record definition. I solved it by modifying the view for SQL Server. I've never had to do that before and I don't know why I had to do it for this specific record. But anyway, I entered the same SQL under the record's "Microsoft SQL Server" definition.
In the properties of PO_SRCH, we can see that it has a related language record. If you're only using one language, you can probably get away without changing this, but I'll do it for completeness. Open PO_SRCHLN. Now add REQ_ID to it (mark it as a key field like you did above), and save it as PO_SRCHLN2 (I'm saving it under a new name so I don't break anything else that may be using PO_SRCHLN).
Edit the SQL the same was as you did above. Note: I didn't have to also change the Microsoft SQL Server definition like I did above. I have no idea why.
Now build PO_SRCHLN2.
Go back to PO_SRCH and change its related language record to PO_SRCHLN2.
Now build PO_SRCH.
Hopefully you didn't get any errors and your search page has the requisition ID in it now. My system doesn't use requisitions so they're all blank in the example below, but the new field is there.
Working on a large content base in WordPress, with the Co-Authors Plus plug-in installed. Several thousand authors. A new author needs to be added using the Guest Author functionality provided by the Co-Authors Plus plugin for WordPress, already enabled and successfully in use in our theme.
The new author wants his name spelled exactly as an existing author with the same name. Attempting to create the author record results in an error, wherein the plugin balks at the duplicate.
We only care about the Display Name - the slugs can be different, even have a number on the end. However, we can't use different fields than we already do, because we can't make the case for changing the front-end code just based on this error/case.
Has anyone had any luck with this, whether through a straightforward and sensible change in the plugin, a different method of data entry, or anything that's not too... "hackish"?
Been tinkering on and off for a couple days and arrived at a solution, although it's not ideal, that allows me to end up with multiple authors that have the same name.
In short, WordPress wants the new author's slug to be different than the first. Once that criterion is met and the record has been created, it appears I can do whatever I want with the Display Name on subsequent edits. The slug is generated automatically from the Display Name when the Guest Author record is created, so the trick is, well, to trick WordPress temporarily.
I followed these steps:
Choose a Display Name for the new author that will result in the creation of a slug you find acceptable. For example, if the original author's Display Name is John Smith (with a slug of john-smith), I used John Smith 2 as the Display Name for the new author.
Save the new author - in my example, the slug created upon saving was john-smith-2.
Now the new author can be edited - I changed the author's Display Name back to John Smith and saved without a problem or error.
Note that the slug, once created, cannot easily be changed, and in my case remained john-smith-2 - so make sure when you're creating the new author with the same name as an existing one that the slug that will be created from the temporary Display Name is something you can live with and, if possible, fits a pattern or system that you can use if you encounter this problem again in the future.
I am having trouble to what i should name this in the title field...
Question is. I want to select a blogpost by entering its title, like this:
http://localhost:3254/blog/2010/10/net-programming
The title of the blogpost should be ".net programming". So i have setup a route to look for a year a month and finally a string. But how should i save this in the database to be able to search for it?
Should i add a field, like id, that contains asp-programming? or should i parse the title for every search? or should i convert the title and then convert it back before displaying it to the user?
The standard method is to create a separate column in the database (usually called 'slug' or permalink) that stores the html-friendly name that may be used by Urls. Then, if the title of the post changes you would normally keep the slug the same so that anyone who has bookmarked the link can still find the post. The value us usually defaulted from the blog title, replacing spaces with - and removing any non url friendly characters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slug_%28web_publishing%29
There are two possible solutions I can think of
Create your own Route handler and within its code, search for the actual record in the database
Create an action method in a Controller that accepts a string parameter and call that parameter id (or whatever the default is in your MapRoutes method).