Is there a name for the Woocommerce product in the product description?

You can do this in several ways.

with functions.php

add_filter( 'the_content', 'display_disclaimer_after_product_description', 10, 1 );
function display_disclaimer_after_product_description( $content ){
    // Only for single product pages
    global $product;
    if( ! is_product() ) return $content;

    $tags_html =  wc_get_product_tag_list( $product->get_id(), ', ', '' . _n( 'Tag:', 'Tags:', count( $product->get_tag_ids() ), 'woocommerce' ) . ' ', '' );

    return $content . $tags_html ;

or you can add
theme / woocommerce / single-product / tabs / description.php

global $post,$product;

$heading = apply_filters( 'woocommerce_product_description_heading', __( 'Description', 'woocommerce' ) );



get_id(), ', ', '' . _n( 'Tag:', 'Tags:', count( $product->get_tag_ids() ), 'woocommerce' ) . ' ', '' ); ?>

position – Description of the 3D swiping hand movement as a curve in an XY plane

I try to describe a 3D swipe gesture (only vertical or horizontal, no diagonals) over a certain flat surface, using conventional geometry or similar techniques without machine learning (hidden Markov model, artificial neural networks, etc. are therefore excluded) possible. From several observations of the data retrieved from the device, I concluded that a stroke can be described "slightly" as a curve (or in some cases as a really straight line). With this question, I would like to know how a curve and a curve movement can be described in simple geometric terms in the most efficient (mostly speed, but also memory-related) way.

The article is divided into two parts – one that contains information about the data used and one that gives an overview of what I have come up with so far. Apologize in advance for my poor painting skills. : D

The 3D position data

The device I use transmits 3D points, each representing the position of the hand at a specific point in time. I can record and evaluate them. The following image shows the graphical representation of the data from two different perspectives – from top to bottom and isometric (more or less):

  • XY plane view (also known on the left as Top down view) – Only the values ​​along the X and Y axes are taken into account for each sample. This view represents the surface of the device over which the movement of the hand is recorded
  • XYZ view (right also known as isometric view) – All three axes are taken into account for each sample. This view represents the complete 3D movement in a volume above the device surface, which defines the area in which gestures can be recognized

Enter image description here

In the next picture I added the hand movement recognized by the device:

Enter image description here

The actual movement looks something like this:

Enter image description here

Based on the observation of the actual and the movement detected by the device, I can mark almost half of the samples that the device gave me as invalid, namely all limit values ​​(a position along each axis can be between 0 and 65534) that this does not describe the actual movement of the hand from the point of view of the user of the device (in the image below, invalid data is shown as the part of the trajectory that is covered by a polygon):

Enter image description here

Of course, sometimes the "valid" part of the trajectory is rather small compared to the invalid data:

Enter image description here

The algorithm described below does not matter how big the valid data is, as long as there are at least 2 samples that meet the requirement that they are not limit positions, ie X and Y differ from 0 and 65534. This results in a problem I'll go into more detail in the next part of this post.

Describe the movement

I thought about it and came up with the following:

  1. Extract only the set of valid samples that exclude all with an edge position

  2. For each sample, generate a local XY coordinate system that is aligned with the XY coordinate system of the device surface (for simplification :)):

    Enter image description here

  3. Next, I consider calculating the vector between the current and the next sample (if any) and calculating the angle between this vector and the X axis (this can also be done with the Y axis):

    Enter image description here

  4. Based on the size of each angle, I can determine whether the movement between the current and the next sample tends more towards the horizontal or vertical and also in which direction.

This should enable me to determine the general direction of the wiping movement as well as the position above the surface. I swiped a lot: D, but since I want to describe this more formally, of course I have to describe my results, so I have to find a way to describe and classify a curve based on its properties. Maybe calculate the curvature of the entire trajectory?

There are, of course, some problems with this algorithm that came to my mind:

I searched online before thinking about creating the algorithm described above, but couldn't find anything. Even the topic of curve classification doesn't seem to be that popular, or the search terms I use are too extensive / restrictive. The classification here is not that important (as opposed to the following ones), but it would still be nice to divide the resulting curves into sets, each representing a swipe gesture.

The next thing I thought about is curve fitting. I've read articles about it, but apart from a few assignments at my university during the math course, I was only concerned about Bezier curves. Can someone tell me if curve fitting is a plausible solution for my case? There it is curve fitting One might rightly assume that we need an initial curve against which we want to adapt. This would require the detection of wiping motions and then the extraction of a possible optimal curve which is something like an "average" of all curves for a given wiping. I can use the first algorithm I described above to get a compact description of a curve, and then save and analyze multiple curves for a given beat to get the "perfect" curve. How do you proceed with curve classification?

Confused about A. Kosinski's description of surgery in his book "Differential Manifolds"

Please excuse me if MO is not the right place for this question. I asked the same question about M.SE

but I'm not sure if MO is the better place to address this. I'm really struggling to understand Kosinski's description of an operation on a manifold.

On p.112 in Kosinski's "Differential Manifolds" he performs Surgery on a $ ( lambda-1) $Sphere in a variety $ M ^ m $, He says

Surgery on one $ ( lambda-1) $Sphere in a variety $ M ^ m $ is special
Case of gluing. We stick $ M $ and $ S ^ m $ along $ S $ and $ S ^ { lambda-1} $,
The resulting distributor is named $ chi (M, S) $, (…) it may be
described as follows:

To let $ T & # 39; = {x in S ^ m mid x_ lambda ^ 2> 0 }; $ we see $ T & # 39; $ As a
tubular neighborhood of $ S ^ { lambda-1} $ in the $ S ^ m $, To let $ h: T & # 39; to M $ His
a diffeomorphism, $ h (S ^ { lambda-1}) = S $, Then $$ chi (M, S) =
(M setminus S) cup_ {h alpha} (S ^ m setminus S ^ { lambda-1}) $$

Annotation: $ alpha $ is the composition of diffeomorphism $ D ^ m setminus S ^ { lambda-1} to mathring {D} ^ lambda times D ^ {m- lambda} $ and the involution on $ ( mathring {D} ^ lambda setminus boldsymbol {0}) times D ^ {m- lambda} $

Then he continues:

Note that the process of attaching a $ lambda $-handle along $ S $
If you limit yourself to the limits, you will be operated on exactly $ S $,
This can be conveniently stated as follows. Consider $ h $ as a
Embedding $ T & # 39; $ in the $ M times {1 } subset M times I $ and insert
$ lambda $-handle to $ M times I $ along $ S $, To let $ W = (M times I) cup
H ^ lambda; $
$ W $ is called the trace of the operation.

My question: whenever I read about surgery $ m $distributors $ M $It is always described as a cut $ S ^ n times D ^ {m-n} $ and glue in $ D ^ {n + 1} times S ^ {m-n-1} $ (see Ranicki's surgical theory) or another source on surgical theory.

I just can't figure out how Kosinski describes this process. Where exactly do we remove? $ S ^ n times D ^ {m-n} $ and glue in $ D ^ {n + 1} times S ^ {m-n-1} $ ?

I understand Kosinski's approach to remove the embedded one $ ( lambda-1) $Sphere of $ M $ and $ S ^ m $ at the same time and past them along the tubular neighborhoods of the embedded sphere $ S ^ { lambda-1} $… while I recognize $ S ^ m $ His $$ S ^ m = partial D ^ {m + 1} = partial (D ^ lambda times D ^ {m- lambda + 1}) = S ^ { lambda-1} times D ^ { m- lambda + 1} cup D ^ lambda times S ^ {m- lambda} $$

I still don't see any connection between the definition of surgery in Kosinski and the common definition I gave (as with Ranicki).

On p.142 Kosinski even mentions himself:

"Surgery is informally referred to as" taking out " $ S ^ k times D ^ {n + 1} $
and glue in $ D ^ {k + 1} times S ^ n $, "

But I don't understand how that relates to his definition that I gave.

Can someone help me understand how they are related or what I may not see here?

Thank you very much

SQL Server – Look up which records correspond to a particular resource description in dm_tran_locks

I've spent the majority of two days figuring out exactly what's locked in one of my tables and why I'm getting deadlocks that don't make sense at first glance.

I've found numerous blogs that explain how to use the undocumented %% lockres %% function to get the hash for a specific row in a table. However, each of these guides only gives the example where the lock in question is on the primary key for the table. I have a strange situation where the primary key is locked and a unique key also.

Context: My primary key is a clustered index for a UUID string. The only other index in this table is a composite unique key for two columns (without pk). If I have one INSERT I can look into this table sys.dm_tran_locks that there are two X KEY locks this table: one for the pk and one for the unique restriction.

My deadlock report seems to imply (unless I'm reading it incorrectly – my other question is here) that the deadlock is caused by a second query that also locks the unique index.

I experimented with the same schema in another database to find out how to determine whether the cause of the deadlock is avoidable or not. I did an INSERT in an open transaction and compared the resource description with %% lockres %% of all records in the locked table. I found that the lock on the primary key corresponds to the row I added, but the lock on the unique index doesn't match anything in the table.

Does anyone know what %% lockres %% is for this unique index? There is clearly no specific record in my table.

For context, here are the queries I ran to display this information:

This query lists the locks for my current database. Issue below.

SELECT dm_tran_locks.request_session_id,
           WHEN resource_type = 'object'
               THEN OBJECT_NAME(dm_tran_locks.resource_associated_entity_id)
           ELSE OBJECT_NAME(partitions.OBJECT_ID)
           END                                     AS ObjectName,
       partitions.index_id,                                AS index_name,

FROM sys.dm_tran_locks
         LEFT JOIN sys.partitions ON partitions.hobt_id = dm_tran_locks.resource_associated_entity_id
         JOIN sys.indexes ON indexes.OBJECT_ID = partitions.OBJECT_ID AND indexes.index_id = partitions.index_id
         CROSS APPLY(
    SELECT LEFT(SUBSTRING(resource_description, 2, LEN(resource_description)), LEN(resource_description) - 2)
) clean(cleanlockrs)
WHERE resource_associated_entity_id > 0
  AND resource_database_id = DB_ID()
  and resource_type = 'KEY'
ORDER BY request_session_id, resource_associated_entity_id

Enter image description here

Then when I run the following query, I only get a result for the resource description for the first index.

-- This returns the row I just added.
select * from entities where %%lockres%% like '%27f49aa9c0ac%'

-- This does not return anything.
select * from entities where %%lockres%% like '%7e24236fccb8%'

8 – How to change the description text for uploading files

I am trying to customize text for a file upload widget in Drupal 8.

Here is a screenshot of the widget:

File upload widget

I just want to show the first one 15 MB what I inserted as a description text field in the content type.

The problem is that the last 3 lines of text don't contain HTML tags so I can't selectively hide them display:none;, Here is what I mean:

HTML for uploading files

I tried this CSS but it doesn't work:

#edit-field-dataset-file-0--description * {

#edit-field-dataset-file-0--description p {
    display:inline !important;

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Meta description: why is it important for SEO? – SEO help (general chat)

A meta description, sometimes referred to as a meta tag or meta description attribute, is an HTML element that contains a brief explanation of the content of the website. In other words, it's the data behind the data, just like in metaphysics. Google uses the meta descriptions (along with the title tag and the URL) to get search results on their pages. You can usually recognize the meta description from the search results of a website. If the meta title helps readers understand the main topic of the paragraph, the meta description helps readers clearly understand what the website is about. Here are some reasons that imply the best about the importance of the meta description.

Full article here: meta description: why is it important for SEO?

, (tagsToTranslate) seo

Service description not linked

I create a web form with two pages. The first page contains an element of the Terms of Use that is set up as a link. I have nowhere found a link that shows how it is associated with the Terms of Service, which are modal with a title and content. Do I need to take additional steps to get the link to open a modal with the terms of the Terms of Service?