modal windows – Material Design | Dialoge from floating action button – how to do it? Is it even a good idea?

I’m designing a dark-mode-first desktop website for an online media organization.
One of the key characteristics of the organiation is its community, and how open, friendly, inviting and communical it is.

So, I thought of designing an FAB (floating action buttion) that supports those characteristics that will be used for connecting with the community.
Impelementation wise, it has a “contact us” text with a relevant icon, and should open up into a dialog. However, I’m not sure if an FAB opening into a dialog is in line with the Material Design guidelines. Is it?

Another issue that I have is that the FAB uses the primary accent color I defined, which I think is fine, since it’s small, how would I color the panel while showing that it’s an expansion of the button? I think it’s an issue for the big dialog from to have a fill primary color, which would be too colorful and bright in this color’s case. If it’s not against the Material Design guidelines, how would you advise me to go about designing it?

I thought of making only a border of the same color and treating the rest of the dialog like a regular card but I’m not sure about that layout.

Page with the contact us FAB:
page-with-contact-us-fab

Page with the contact us dialog open, red border, grey fill color:
page-with-contact-us-dialog-open--border-red-fill-grey

Page with the contact us dialog open, red fill color:
page-with-contact-us-dialog-open--fill-red

I also saw a this Codepen that uses the same structure, only uses a menu header (I don’t know what else to call it) that has the FAB’s color. I’m not sure if it’s a good idea, but I’m thinking of having 2 sections in that dialog, which I think would be a good idea for this use case to be implemented as tabs. With 2 sections, one would be links to all the communities, and the other one will be for contacting the organization directly, so that Codepen’s structure with the header might be a good idea.

I’d appreciate thoughts on that structure as well.

Note about a closing option being missing: whichever structure I go with I’d have to choose what kind of closing mechanism I want, so in the meantime I didn’t add this option.

EDIT: I could also implement a contact option via a form, which would make the active role of the dialog a contact us/support dialog, in which case the positioning and the structure (dialog) would be traditional.

dnd 5e – Multiple instances of the spell of Animate Dead and bonus action scope

If you cast Animate Dead, that allows you to use a bonus action to command any creature you made from “this spell”. Do multiple instances of the effects created by the spell named Animate Dead apply to “this spell”, or only one instance of the effects created by “this spell”?

That is, does “this spell” refer to the instance of the spell you cast when you cast it, or does it generally refer to the spell in name and all instances of that spell name whenever it is cast?

On each of your turns, you can use a bonus action to mentally command any creature you made with this spell if the creature is within 60 feet of you (if you control multiple creatures, you can command any or all of them at the same time, issuing the same command to each one).

Same question applies for multiple spells of Create Undead or multiple castings of any similar and singular spell name.

Similar question answered here:
Can I command both Ghouls and Zombies/Skeletons with one bonus action?

It seems entirely ambiguous to me and no clear direction to lean towards. I know of no good comparisons that do have clear RAW or RAI. The difference of interpretations is extremely substantial, potentially 14 vs 98 creatures. Further, I could not find this question asked anywhere else on the internet.

pathfinder 2e – Hiding without using Hide action

As a small matter, your Rogue isn’t actually hidden, but undetected, since the wall prevents the enemy from seeing the Rogue at all and the enemy has no idea what square the Rogue would be in behind the wall. Undetected starts with:

When you are undetected by a creature, that creature cannot see you at all, has no idea what space you occupy, and can’t target you,

Having a wall between the Rogue and an enemy usually makes it so that the enemy cannot see the Rogue (obviously some special senses can get around this). If you’re Rogue were to have some way to see through the wall and shoot the enemy (some Ethereal Sight and Ethereal Arrow combo, perhaps, that I’m not aware of), the enemy would be flat-footed. From Undetected:

When you’re undetected by a creature, that creature is flat-footed to you.

This means that your Rogue can indeed Sneak somewhere while still (pending a Stealth roll) being Undetected. Note, they have to end their movement with some form of cover, concealment, or invisibility; see this line from Sneak:

You don’t get to roll against a creature if, at the end of your movement, you neither are concealed from it nor have cover or greater cover against it. You automatically become observed by such a creature.

So simply running behind a wall is rarely going to actually give the Rogue a chance to make a Sneak Attack, assuming they have nothing else to hide behind. But it does grant them the ability to Sneak, since they’d be Undetected at the start of their movement. From Sneak:

At the end of your movement, the GM rolls your Stealth check in secret and compares the result to the Perception DC of each creature you were hidden from or undetected by at the start of your movement.

Yes, pending the normal Sneak caveats. Although your Rogue is actually Undetected at the start of their turn, not simply Hidden.

dnd 5e – Multiple castings of Animate Dead and bonus action scope

If you cast Animate Dead, that allows you to use a bonus action to command any creature you made from “this spell”. Do multiple instances of casting Animate Dead apply to “this spell”, or only one instance of “this spell”?

That is, does “this spell” refer to the instance of the spell you cast, or does it generally refer to the spell in name?

On each of your turns, you can use a bonus action to mentally command any creature you made with this spell if the creature is within 60 feet of you (if you control multiple creatures, you can command any or all of them at the same time, issuing the same command to each one).

Same question applies for multiple castings of Create Undead or multiple castings of any similar and singular spell name.

Similar question answered here:
Can I command both Ghouls and Zombies/Skeletons with one bonus action?

It seems entirely ambiguous to me and no clear direction to lean towards. I know of no good comparisons that do have clear RAW or RAI. The difference of interpretations is extremely substantial, potentially 14 vs 98 creatures. Further, I could not find this question asked anywhere else on the internet.

dnd 5e – Does a fighter’s Action Surge trigger Extra Attack?

Context

A player in my game will play a fighter with a greatsword. At 5th level he has Extra Attack and the option to use Action Surge. PHB p.72 states:

Action Surge. Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one
additional action on top of your regular action
and a possible bonus
action.

Once you use this feature, you must finish a short or long rest before
you can use it again. Starting at 17th level, you can use it twice
before a rest, but only once on the same turn.

Extra Attack. Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once,
whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.

The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level in
this class and to four when you reach 20th level in this class.

Confusion

The questions and answers that I find on here deal with multi-classing or Two Weapon fighting specifically, which don’t really give a clear yes or no on my question.

The way I read these two features is that when a fighter takes an Attack action, he gets the Extra Attack. After using Action Surge he gets the opportunity to take another Attack action, and with that another Extra Attack. This results in four attacks with the greatsword in one turn, which sounds amazing but also rather powerful. Is this correct, or am I missing something?

magento2 – Magento 2 disable Delete Action Button admin

I’ve made a new module in Magento 2 and I’ve added a table in admin.

I’ve extended the AbstractFieldArray class and this is the function that creates the table

protected function _prepareToRender() {
    $this->addColumn('id', ('label' => __('ID'), 'class' => 'required-entry'));
    $this->addColumn('message', ('label' => __('Message'), 'class' => 'required-entry'));

    $this->addColumn('show_in_frontend', (
        'label' => __('Show Frontend'),
        'renderer' => $this->getShowFrontend()
    ));

    $this->_addAfter = false;
    $this->_addButtonLabel = __('Add');

}

It shows like this in admin:

enter image description here

I would like to disable the Action from my table (So nobody should delete a row from my table), do you have any ideas how can I do that?
Also, the ID should be autoincremented and I shouldn’t be able to edit it

co.combinatorics – Independent vectors in the permuting coordinates action of $S_n$ on $mathbb{R}^n$

Let $V$ be the hyperplane in $mathbb{R}^n$ with equation $sum_i x_i=0$. The symmetric group $S_n$ acts on $V$ by $scdot (v_1,ldots,v_n)=(v_{s^{-1}(1)},ldots,v_{s^{-1}(n)})$. Consider those $vin V$ with the following property:

For any $n-1$ elements $s_1=text{id},s_2,ldots,s_{n-1}in S_n$, the vectors
$v,s_2cdot v,ldots,s_{n-1}cdot v$ are independent.

Question: what $v$ have this property?

Some simple observations:

  1. If $H_{ij}$, for $1leq i<jleq n$, is the hyperplane in $mathbb{R}^n$ with equation $x_i-x_j=0$ (i.e. a reflecting hyperplane of $S_n$ in the permuting coordinates action on $mathbb{R}^n$) then a $v$ with the property above cannot lie in $Vcap H_{ij}$.
  2. If $X$ is a proper non-empty subset of ${1,ldots,n}$ and $H_X$ is the hyperplane with equation $sum_{iin X}x_i=0$ then a $v$ with the property above cannot lie in $Vcap H_X$.
  3. When $n=3$ the $vin V$ that remain after removing those in (1) and (2) satisfy the property above.

layout – Override sales_order_grid.xml to remove print options from mass action drop down in sales orders

Hello everyone,

I’m trying to override the file sales_order_grid.xml to remove some print options from the mass action drop down in sales orders. I’m using Magento 2.4.2.

The original file is located here:

vendormagentomodule-salesviewadminhtmlui_componentsales_order_grid.xml
  1. Where should I put the file to override it?
  2. Do I need to to create a module?
  3. Can I just make a copy of the file somewhere in my custom theme?

Thank you very much,

c# – ¿Como añadir un Action como TValue en un diccionario?

Tengo estas dos listas:

List<IEvent> iEvent = new List<IEvent>();
List<IEventListener> listeners = new List<IEventListener>();

Y quería sustituirlas por dos diccionarios.

private Dictionary<IEvent, Action<EventInfo, Type, Property> eventSender;
private Dictionary<IEventListener,Action<EventInfo, Type, Property>> eventListerner;

Esta era la funcion original para añadir EventSenders:

public void AddSender(IEvent sender)
{       
    if (!iEvent.Contains(sender))
    {
        iEvent.Add(sender);
        isEventAdded = true;
    }
}

Y queria sustituirlo por esto porque a veces me interesa saber a que objeto pertenece el evento:

public void AddSender(IEvent sender)
{
    eventSender.Add(sender, sender.OnEvent); //-->error
}

Tengo un mensaje de error que me dice que “sender.OnEvent” solo puede ir a la izquierda de += o -=

Me ocurre exactamente lo mismo con la función de añadir Listeners

public void AddListener(IEventListener listener)
{
    listeners.Add(listener);
    
    foreach (IEvent sender in iEvent)
    {
        sender.OnEvent += listener.Listen;                      
    }
}

¿Hay alguna forma de poder añadir “sender.OnEvent” en el diccionario?

Muchas gracias!!

dnd 5e – Does Minor Illusion break only when someone spends an action to investigate it?

Using Minor Illusion to create a 5×5′ cube of stone, one of my players who was a 6’4″ ranger claimed it gave him three quarters cover and that he was shooting over it. I was okay with that. But after an Orc shot an arrow at him, and missed, I wanted to say that it broke the illusion by hitting his illusory stone and passing through – but he argued that it wasn’t “physical interaction” as the Orc didn’t use an action to target the stone.

Is it, or isn’t it? Does the way the spell is written require walking up to the illusion and touching it/poking it with a blade, or targeting the stone purposefully with ranged attack?

Clarification: I guess what I’m asking is, can the illusion be broken unintentionally, or does it require an action?