Website Design Services For Small and Big Businesses

A powerful and recognizable brand helps a business climb the success ladder rapidly. For this very reason, creating an effective website is quite important. To apply brand values to visual elements that are used to promote the business hiring a professional website design company. Contact us today for consultation or to raise a quote.

Doubt about Database design (newbie)

I am learning about Database design, I have doubt about some database design conepts

I want to know which is better design between two design

Design 1

there is two tables: Object and Field

Object

| ID | NAME|

ID is PK

Field

| ID | OBJECT_ID | NAME

Both ID and OBJECT_ID are PK and OBJECT_ID IS FK


Design 2

there is three tables: Object, ObjectField and Field

Object

| ID | NAME |

ID is primary key

Field

| ID | NAME |

ID is primary key

ObjectField

| OBJECT_ID | FIELD_ID |

Both OBJECT_ID AND FIELD_ID is PK and FK

relation is stored in another table

DB Design – Assigning users to multiple sites with different roles

I am working on a DB design that lets me manage roles and permissions for each user per site. These are my business rules:

  • A user can manage multiple sites
  • A user can only have one role per site
  • A site can have multiple users

I already have two designs that I came up with, I just need validation which one would work better against my business rules.

First is using a ternary table site_user_role that consists of a relationship between site, user and role table. But this already breaks the rule of a user having only one role per site because those 3 primary keys would be unique and I can create a combination of two roles for a user within 1 site. Any complications with this design?

enter image description here

The second idea is having two binary tables. The site_user and site_user_role table. This arrangement I am quite sure I will not duplicate a role for a user on a site. But Is it weird to have a primary key aside from the Foreign keys on the site_user binary table? Any complications with this design?

enter image description here

Schema design for store billing with multiple payment providers

What I’m doing

I’m writing a Telegram bot using TelegrafJS + MongoDB, this bot allow the user to subscribe to a private channel using three types of billing:

  • PayPal
  • Stripe
  • Manual (when the user doesn’t have any credit card, I generate manually an access code for the private channel, when the user insert the access code, a subscription is created).

The main problem here is the customer reference, infact when I generate a subscription using PayPal or Stripe the customer_id is different ’cause they are different payment providers, so I have the following situation:

P. Provider | Customer Id | Subscription Id    PayPal        1ac            a    Stripe        2ac            b 

actually a I created the following model for store the customer and the subscriptions:

Customer Model

let CustomerSchema = new Schema({     telegram_id: Number,     email: {         type: String     },     hasTrial: {         type: Boolean,         default: true     },     subscriptions: [SubscriptionSchema],     created_at: {         type: Date,         default: Date.now,         required: true     } }); 

as you can see there is the field telegram_id, this is valorized using the telegram.chat.id of the user, and allow me to manage the user in the private channel (resource that the user pays to access).

There is also the hasTrial field, which allow me to create a manual subscription just one time, this subscription isn’t linked to any payment providers but is stored in the same way of others subscriptions:

Subscription Model

let SubscriptionSchema = new Schema({     _id: String,     period_start: {         type: Date,         required: true     },     period_end: {         type: Date,         required: true     },     status: {         type: String,         required: true     },     plan_id: {         type: String,         required: true     } }); 

the main question is: how can I keep track of subscription a and b which are part of different payment providers (so different customer_id)?

What I thought

I thought to create two additional fields in the Customer Model as:

stripe_id: String paypal_id: String 

but I honestly don’t like this solution. I need to store someway the the customer id of both payment providers ’cause the subscription status is changed via the webhooks, eg:

  1. Stripe send subscription.cancelled hook to b subscription which is linked to 2ac customer
  2. My application set the subscription status as canceled and also kick out from the channel the user which have as telegram_id: 5

with the current database design I can’t know which user the subscription is linked to..

Could you suggest me something?

Build beautiful websites even if you don’t know design

Hello webmasters,

Today I have written a very informative post about web developers who struggle to build beautiful websites. I use to struggle but after I learned these concepts my designs got better a lot. Hope you find it useful …

http://www.farrisfahad.com/post/how-to-design-a-beautiful-website-as-a-web-developer

What success rate design is the most “fun”?

I’m looking for researched answers here, not just your feeling of what you like best.

I’m setting up a lego based rpg for a bunch of young children, and my friend and I are trying to figure out what “DC” will be the most fun for the kids.

We both feel that a DC of “3” or “4” is good, but are divided on if that should be rolled on a d6 or a d10.

I thought I had read somewhere that 70% success rate is the most fun, but now I can’t find it.

Relevant background: There are no skill modifiers. Things you are good at require a 3 or better, everything else requires a 4 or better. Things that are impossible or things you always succeed at are not roled. The premise of the question is as follows: Always losing is not fun, always winning is not fun either. 50% is the most fair, but because people prefer to win, they would have more fun if they won more than 50% of the time but less than 100% of the time.
I.e. is it better to do this on a d6 with a 50% or 66.66% chance of success, or on a d10 with a 60% or 70% chance of success. (or even a d20 with a 80% or 85% chance of success.. but I’m guessing that wouldn’t be fun)

Each attack does 1 or 2 damage(warrior or mage) and each creature/character has 2-8 hp. Mage spells are move Lego brick, do 1 point of damage with Lego flame, heal, or fly to any chosen spot within movement range.

Is it legal to design and publish a game with D&D’s ability scores?

If I were to design an RPG that had Str/Dex/Con/etc… would it be legal to publish it? I know that games like Pathfinder and Dungeon World got away with it, but I’m not sure how or why.

Looking at D&D 5e’s recent OGL, I have found that the following items are considered Intellectual Property and are not Open content:

Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Player’s Handbook, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerûn, proper names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Underdark, Red Wizard of Thay, the City of Union, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, EverChanging Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanar’ri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti.

All of the rest of the SRD5 is Open Game Content as described in Section 1(d) of the License.

Since it doesn’t list mention any of its ability scores, it seems that it’s fine. Except that I’m not sure if these ability scores count as a component of the d20 system (which, again, is not Open Content).

So can I do this? Why or why not?

Can I wield a Saw-tooth Sabre with my tail as a Ratfolk using the Versatile Design weapon modification while being a Red Mantis Assassin?

I started playing a Rogue Ratfolk and have brought myself to the RMA prestige class. I used to wield a ratfolk Tailblade to maximise sneak potential, but it didn’t work out because the attacks kept missing so I abandoned this idea. However after a year of playing I suddenly discovered weapon modifications from Advanced Armory.

The Versatile Design feature says that weapons with such a mod can be treated as a different weapon fighting group with the limitation of converting melee weapons to range (which does not matter in this case). Although, it can be changed to the Natural weapon group, which contains ‘tail’ I suppose.

I can apply Weapon Adept and Exotic Weapon proficiency granted by the feats I already have. Moreover, I would also apply Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization granted by the Red Mantis Assassin class.

I have Amulet of the mighty fists with Agile enchantment as well, so applying Dex to attack rolls with natural weapons is not a problem.

So now I’d really like to return to idea of three-weapon fighting but I’m having a sort of confrontation about whether I can make this combination with my GM.

Would having Versatile Design on a Sawtooth Sabre allow me to wield it on my tail, therefore having my tail weapon benefit from all the feats granted by the Red Mantis Assassin?