e-commerce | dolap.com interview project credit_card | Object-Relational Mapping library

Method 1 out of the options given is best.

None of them would fail WCAG as such.

However as you have pointed out 2 and 3 result in duplication of effort for keyboard users and links to the same location having different names, which is not a fail under any success criterion but is highly recommended.

Yes in scenario 1 and 4.

All 4 of the examples given would "pass" WCAG. However they offer very different experiences.

So the question is what things are we considering for accessibility?

The first is Keyboard operability. Examples 2 and 3, as you pointed out result in duplication of focus stops for the same item. So we should avoid them.

The second thing is link purpose. Yet again examples 2 and 3 are not great here as we have 2 links to the same place on the same page that have different accessible labels / text that assistive tech will use.

So we can rule out options 2 and 3 for best practices.

So what about options 1 and 4?

Well as the items are located within a hyperlink we want the link text (the accessible name for those links) to be descriptive of the product page we are going to visit.

As such option one would read: "link: Squeaky Fox Dog Toy" and the second link would read "link: (image) Red fox stuffed dog toy with white braided rope arms, Squeaky Fox Dog Toy"

The second option results in duplication of information so is not as desirable as the first option.

So we land on option 1.

The only consideration you now have is whether that link text describes the product sufficiently. Now if you sold multiple dog toys (different product types) then you need text that describes them as such i.e. "plastic dog toys" and "fluffy dog toys".

If you sell different coloured products and they all had their own page (so you don't have a colour picker on the end page, they are listed as separate items) then you would need to describe the colour there too. "Red fluffy dog toy", "blue fluffy dog toy".

Essentially you need to provide enough information that each product link is easily identifiable as to where it leads (the purpose of the link itself).

This is where judgement comes into play, provide enough information to describe the product generally in a unique way on the page, not so much information that browsing that page becomes problematic due to 100 products with 200 word link text.

So in the example given the "balance" would be something like "Red fox stuffed dog toy", and then describe the appearance in far more detail on the product page, wither in the description or in the product image alt attributes.

It is worth noting that the last option for a product page is no text at all. Just an image inside a link. The following is also valid HTML and accessible as the alt text will be used as the link text (not if an image contains any text at all that should all appear in the alt attribute).

In spring boot, pages are searched under "templates" folder and resources are mapped under "static" folder by default. To access an image file under static folder, try

Solved the problem using UpdateRecord without adding to upstream ValidateCSV.

In controller services, CSVReader and CSVRecordSetWriter were modified as follows:

• Changed property Schema Access Strategy of processor CSVReader to User String Fields From Header
• Changed all properties to the default of processor CSVRecordSetWriter

Here are the test results:

• In GenerateFlowFile, the following text to change to format yyyyMMddHmmss was made into csv

• NiFi expressions to be modified in UpdateRecord

• CSVRecordSetWriter left the default setting and set CSVReader as follows

• After completing the above setting, the value may be converted without an error

Searched to see the file in the error log and found the cause. It seemed to be inferred as type string, but it was type float, resulting in the above error.

Thank you for your comments. @VikramsinhShinde @Sdairs

Swagger2's usage seems to require (or at least often includes) the concept of a Docket api via an instantiation such as new Docket() or new Docket(DocumentationType.SWAGGER_2). I don't see that in your code snippets, so wonder if that may be one issue.

Per the swagger docs, Docket is Springfox’s primary api configuration mechanism.

Specifically, this section regarding configuration may be helpful. Note the Docket instantiation:

Try Promise.all

First of all, storing ["a", "ap", "app", "appl", "apple"] into an array and performing an whereArrayContains() query, doesn't sound like a feasible idea. Why? Imagine you have a really big online shop with 100k products, in which 5k start with "a". Are you willing to pay 5k reads every time a user types "a"? That's a very costly feature.

Most likely you should return the corresponding documents when the user types, for example, two, or even three characters. You'll reduce costs enormously. Or you might take into consideration using the solution I have explained in the following article:

• How to filter Firestore data cheaper?

Let's go forward.

For example, in every case, the documents that would be returned on each successive call where an additional letter was typed would be a subset of what was returned in the previous call, it would just be a smaller list of documents.

Yes, that's correct.

My question is since the documents retrieved on a successive query are a subset of those retrieved in a prior query, would I be charged reads based on how many documents each successive query returns?

Yes. You'll always be charged with a number of reads that is equal to the number of documents that are returned by your query. It doesn't matter if a query was previously performed, or not. Every time you perform a new query, you'll be charged with a number of reads that is equal to the number of documents you get.

For example, let's assume you perform this query:

I strongly advice not to use the token positions to boost your product over accessories. Imagine a customer is searching for "EOS 80D" - he will still get the silicone cover on first position.

A better solution would be to boost on a secondary field. Some ideas:

• put a boost function on the price, as the main products usually have higher prices as the accessories e.g bf=log(price)
• use a field to categorize your items in products and accessories - and put a boost on this, e.g. bq=category:product
• create a field to list the products that an assessory can be used with. This will also help you to advertise the accessories in future. But it will now also help to find the main products, by boosting the the documents that don't contain references here.

I know that this answer is not a direct solution for the original question - but sometimes there are much simpler solutions for a problem if you look at it from a distance.

Are you looking for something like that:

Split each row into a list and explode this list into rows then get unique values of the column.

You have too many columns to fit on one line, so the lines wrap. You can limit the number of columns that you show with a .select() before the show: