 | Knowledge |
|
| |  | Powder |
Gnibo created an article from about 63149 text blocks
Our Maca is of the highest quality, grown in the Andes and is organically certified. To ensure it retains all of it's potency, our Maca is carefully dried and powder ed. This also makes it easy to use (maca-powder.nat....een.co.uk/)
The POWDER Working Group member only link )is open to W3C members and invited experts . The working group meets weekly byphone. Face-to-face meetings are held up to four times per year. (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
POWDER has an inherent need for rules to define the scope of a descriptionand for when one description should be used in preference to another.Furthermore, some applications will store user preferences as rules and it itwill be beneficial to be able to copy these user preferences betweenclients. Cooperation and discussion with RIF is therefore importan (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
The POWDER Working Group seeks close cooperation with WAI on the labellingof resources that meet WCAG guidelines and with the ERT WG on integrationwith EARL (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
TAG has published a number of relevant findings and POWDER will need toensure conformance with these. For example the April 2006 finding on AuthoritativeMetadata (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
POWDER will need to draw on this group's expertise and guidance,particularly in relation to the applications of POWDER deliverables outsideDescription Resources (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
There may be features in common between the protocol for accessingdescription resources developed by POWDER and a protocol useful forCC/PP. The POWDER Working Group should track future work on a protocolfor CC/PP in the Ubiquitous Web Applications Working Group(successor to the Device Independence Working Group)and identify any such opportunities for common features (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
POWDER will need to explore non-Semantic Web technologies as alternativeapproaches to meeting its aims. In particular input will be sought from the XML Query (XQuery) group on theresource grouping Recommendation (www.w3.org/2007/powder/)
This is a First Public Working Draft, designed to aid discussion. In particular the group wishes to receive feedback on sections marked as TBD. The POWDER Use Cases and Requirements document [ PUC ] details the use cases and requirements that motivated the creation this document (www.w3.org....-20070709/)
The syntax of a URI, as defined in RFC3986 [URIS] , provides a generic framework for identification schemes that goes beyond what is demanded by the POWDER use cases [ PUC ]. We therefore limit our work to IRIs and URIs with the syntax (www.w3.org....-20070709/)
The semantics and constraints of each of the terms in Table 1 is further defined in the POWDER Vocabulary document [ VOC ]. Precise details of how values for each term are combined is discussed is Section 4 below. However, it is worth noting the points made in the following sub-sections (www.w3.org....-20070709/)
This example serves to highlight an important point: that it is perfectly possible to create a set definition that includes logical inconsistencies. A POWDER processor MUST, indeed can only, treat such Resource Set definitions as the Empty Set. (www.w3.org....-20070709/)
The POWDER Vocabulary [ VOC ] uses pre-defined data types from XML Schema as well as other atomic data types, and then derives list data types from them. As the following examples show, an analogous approach can be taken with any system used for identifying resources so that little augmentation would be needed for a POWDER processor to be able to handle the data (www.w3.org....-20070709/)
The editors duly acknowledge the earlier work in this area carried out by Jo Rabin and the contributions made by all members of the POWDER Working Group (www.w3.org....-20070709/)
The purpose of the Protocol for Web Description Resources (POWDER ) is to provide a means for individuals or organizations to describe a group of resources through the publication of machine-readable metadata, as motivated by the POWDER Use Cases [USECASES] . This document details the creation and lifecycle of Description Resources (DRs), which encapsulate such metadat (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
As well as conforming to the POWDER vocabulary [ VOC ], Description Resources serialized in XML MUST also validate against the XML Schema [ WDRD ]. This provides POWDER processors with a quick validation rout (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
, allows resources that already provide a description, such as a tag, to be linked directly to a POWDER Descriptors class. A typical usage scenario for (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
The Descriptors do NOT describe the Description Resource. Hence, if something like a user-generated tag is mapped to a POWDER Descriptor class, it is the tagged item that is described, not the tag itsel (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
A classification indicates that a resource has passed a series of tests, meets a set of criteria, or otherwise possesses a pre-defined set of properties. The classification SHOULD be published as an instance of POWDER ' (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
The above example DR states that the entity described at http://example.net/foaf.rdf#me certifies that the DR athttp://www.example.com/powder .rdf#dr1 is true. This may be displayed to end users as the text 'Example.net certifies that the claims made by example.com are true'and/or as the image available at http://www.example.net/icons/seal.png (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
N.B. Any such change must take account of the valid until date given in the DR and the fact that a POWDER -aware user agent may cache DRs until that date occurs. The Primer has more to say about this (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
A. Baking soda and baking powder are both leavening agents used in baked goods. Their properties are slightly different, so one should not be substituted for another (recipes.howstuffworks.com....stions.htm)
A. Baking powder is a leavener, meaning it makes baked goods rise. It's a mixture of cornstarch, baking soda, and an acid. When mixed with liquid, the baking soda and acid react to produce carbon dioxide gas; that gas is what makes baked goods rise (recipes.howstuffworks.com....stions.htm)
There are three types of baking powder : fast-acting, slow-acting, and double-acting. Fast-acting baking powder dissolves rapidly in liquid and begins acting right awa (recipes.howstuffworks.com....stions.htm)
This is a Public Working Draft, designed to aid discussion. The POWDER Use Cases and Requirements document [ PUC ] details the use cases and requirements that motivated the creation this document. Changes since earlier versions of this document are recorded in the change log (www.w3.org....-20071031/)
The syntax of a URI, as defined in RFC3986 [URIS] , provides a generic framework for identification schemes that goes beyond what is demanded by the POWDER use cases [ PUC ]. We therefore limit our work to IRIs and URIs with the syntax: (www.w3.org....-20071031/)
The semantics and constraints of each of the terms in Table 2 is further defined in the POWDER Vocabulary document [ VOC ]. Precise details of how values for each term are combined is discussed is Section 4 below. However, it is worth noting the points made in the following sub-sections (www.w3.org....-20071031/)
breaks the design goals since a generic POWDER processor will not be able to determine with certainty whether a given candidate resource is or is not an element of the Resource Set. Referring to Example 3-1, two different outputs are possible (www.w3.org....-20071031/)
This example serves to highlight an important point: that it is perfectly possible to create a set definition that includes logical inconsistencies. A POWDER processor MUST, indeed can only, treat such Resource Set definitions as the Empty Se (www.w3.org....-20071031/)
The meeting this week focussed on one topic how to apply POWDER where there is no structure in a Web site's URIs that can be used to create meaningful URISets (www.w3.org/2007/powder/blog)
The group then turned its attention to the new POWDER model that was discussed at the recent Athens face to face (see Jeremy Carroll's summary and previous entries on this blog (www.w3.org/2007/powder/blog)
So how can you have DRs with different attribution? By having multiple POWDER documents (and it's worth noting that one POWDER package may link to DRs in other POWDER documents). (www.w3.org/2007/powder/blog)
Satisfying an audience that makes ever greater demands requiresincreasingly personalized content, on the fly aggregation and smarternavigation. This is the underlying driver behind the W3C's new Protocol forWeb Description Resources (POWDER ) (www.w3.org....genda.html)
What exactly is it? What can it do that can't be done already? How does itfit in with what is already being done successfully? How will POWDER enablecontent and service providers to improve their offering? (www.w3.org....genda.html)
The POWDER Working Group is making rapid progress and expects to beseeking test implementations in spring of this year. The meeting will provide timelyinformation to those who stand to benefit most from the new technology andwhose input is critical in ensuring that it meets existing commercial needswhilst opening new possibilities (www.w3.org....genda.html)
This document sets out the use cases and requirements that have motivated the development of the Protocol for Web Description Resources (POWDER ).The use cases address social and commercial needs to provide information about groups of Web resources, such as those available from a Web site, to aid the annotation and/or personalization of content for end users in varying delivery contexts (www.w3.org....-20070525/)
This is a W3C Working Group Note of the POWDER Use Cases and Requirements, developed by the POWDER Working Group as part of the Semantic Web Activity ,to aid public discussion and solicit feedback on the group's aims. The group is particularly keen to learn of other potential use cases or additional features that should be considered for POWDER . (www.w3.org....-20070525/)
POWDER will address these demands by defining a method through which relatively small amounts of metadata, that can be produced quickly and easily, can be applied to large amounts of conten (www.w3.org....-20070525/)
The use cases and requirements for POWDER were originally developed under the Web Content Label Incubator Activity . They have been revised and updated for this Working Group Note (www.w3.org....-20070525/)
The editor acknowledges the contributions of members of the POWDER WG and the WCL-XG in compiling this document. In particular Dan Appelquist, Dave Rooks, Pantelis Nasikas, Kjetil Kjernsmo, Kai-Dietrich Scheppe, Kendall Clark, Jo Rabin, Kevin Smith ,Alan Chuter and Zeph Harben (www.w3.org....-20070525/)
This is the namespace document for the XML schema used in the Protocol for Web Description resources (POWDER ). It defines the datatypes used and the structure for Description Resources where these are serialized in XM (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
This is the namespace document for the XML schema used in the Protocol for Web Description resources (POWDER ). It provides a human-readable summary of the XML Schema itself (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
This is a W3C Working Group Note of the POWDER Use Cases and Requirements, developed by the POWDER Working Group as part of the Semantic Web Activity .After reflecting on comments received on the previous version of this document, the Working Group believes it to be stable and therefore to be suitable as the basis for the group's ongoing work. The differences between this document and the previous version can be found in section 6 (www.w3.org....-20070831/)
POWDER will address these demands by defining a method through which relatively small amounts of metadata, that can be produced quickly and easily, can be applied to large amounts of content (www.w3.org....-20070831/)
The use cases and requirements for POWDER were originally developed under the Web Content Label Incubator Activity . They have been revised and updated for this Working Group Note. (www.w3.org....-20070831/)
The mission of the Protocol for Web Description Resources (POWDER ) WorkingGroup is to develop a mechanism through which structured metadata("Description Resources") can be authenticated and applied to groups of Web resources .This mechanism will allow retrieval of the description resources withoutretrieval of the resources they describ (www.w3.org....er_charter)
The W3C PICS Recommendation and thefirst W3C RDFModel and Syntax Recommendation included a very simple method forgrouping resources based solely on a given prefix for URIs. This methodproved insufficient for many applications and has been deprecated insubsequent RDF specifications. Other limitations of PICS that are addressedby RDF and by the protocol to be specified by the POWDER Working Groupinclude (www.w3.org....er_charter)
In its operations, specifications, and test materials the POWDER WorkingGroup will comply with the relevant guidelines of the W3C Quality AssuranceWorking Group QAWG ) (www.w3.org....er_charter)
POWDER has an inherent need for rules to define the scope of a descriptionand for when one description should be used in preference to another.Furthermore, some applications will store user preferences as rules and it itwill be beneficial to be able to copy these user preferences betweenclients. Cooperation and discussion with RIF is therefore important. (www.w3.org....er_charter)
POWDER will need to draw on this group's expertise and guidance,particularly in relation to the applications of POWDER deliverables outsideDescription Resource (www.w3.org....er_charter)
There may be features in common between the protocol for accessingdescription resources developed by POWDER and a protocol useful forCC/PP. The POWDER Working Group should track future work on a protocolfor CC/PP in the Device Independence Working Group or its successorand identify any such opportunities for common features (www.w3.org....er_charter)
For participation in the POWDER Working Group, the requirementsfor meeting attendance and timely response are described in the W3CProcess Document. This participation (attending meetings, reviewingdocuments, preparing drafts or tools) is expected to consume approximately one day per week (www.w3.org....er_charter)
This is the namespace document for the POWDER vocabulary. It provides a formal definition for each class and property, acting as a companion document to POWDER 's Description Resources and Grouping of Resources Recommendations (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
This is the namespace document for the POWDER vocabulary. It provides a formal definition for each class and property, consistent with the RDF/OWL encoding for which the recommended QName i (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
(for Web Description Resources). The context in which the vocabulary was developed is described in two Recommendations: POWDER : Description Resources [ DR ] and POWDER : Grouping of Resources [ Group ]. Finally, POWDER : Datatypes [ WDRD ], completes the set of documents. For each Class and property defined here, the relevant section of the relevant external document is referenced as a 'see also' link (www.w3.org....-20070925/)
During this discussion the group also considered the use of 'example' websites. There are instances in the UCR document and elsewhere where 'example.mobi' has been used. However, it was recognised by the group that RFC 2606 refers specifically to example.com, example.org and example.net and these will be used throughout POWDER documentatio (www.w3.org....0july_2007)
Similarly, there will be no POWDER -defined predicate to support icons or logos. However, the document will " note that foaf:depiction may be used to describe either the creator (e.g. a logo), the descriptor (e.g. contains violence), or both (fooRaters says this is accessible). (www.w3.org....0july_2007)
The big drawback is that it prevents a DR creator specifying his/her own sub-properties and Classes and using those instead of the POWDER vocabulary (a semantic processor would understand the relationships, an XML processor would flag a validation error) (www.w3.org....0july_2007)
Q. How Should (Facial) Powder Be Applied? From About.com A. Powder application is a personal thing and it also depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Play around with both a brush and a puff to see what works best for you. Here are some guidelines to help you get started (beauty.about.com....rapply.htm)
&&1. A fluffy brush that can be dipped into loose powder , tapped to remove the excess and then dusted over your face. It will give a light dusting and will also help to set your makeup (beauty.about.com....rapply.htm)
&&2. Some makeup artists prefer to use a powder puff that has been saturated with powder . The puff is then rolled gently over the skin applying a soft layer. This will also set your makeup, but with a slightly heavier coating of powder giving your skin a more velvety texture. (beauty.about.com....rapply.htm)
&&Some women prefer the pressed powder that is conveniently packaged in a compact along with a puff. They are &very convenient for touch-ups when you are away from home (beauty.about.com....rapply.htm)
It was resolved that we'll produce a separate document that describes the individual terms (i.e. Classes and properties) in the vocabulary as defined by both the Grouping and main POWDER docs. This will map directly from (and may even be auto-generated from) the actual RDF/OWL dat (www.w3.org....r/2007/06/)
First it was resolved that where regular expressions are used in Resource Set definitions, we will use the Perl 5 syntax. However, we will also note that alternatives are available, in particular, XML REs and and the new syntax under discussion in the X Query WG. Such alternatives may be used in the document if ready in time or in a future iteration of POWDER (www.w3.org....r/2007/06/)
Following the face to face meting in Washington on 10 July, the working group members were joined by around 20 guests from various industry sectors that stand to benefit from POWDER . A full report on the event and the discussion held is available (www.w3.org....r/2007/07/)
During this discussion the group also considered the use of 'example' websites. There are instances in the UCR document and elsewhere where 'example.mobi' has been used. However, it was recognised by the group that RFC 2606 refers specifically to example.com, example.org and example.net and these will be used throughout POWDER documentation. (www.w3.org....r/2007/07/)
The big drawback is that it prevents a DR creator specifying his/her own sub-properties and Classes and using those instead of the POWDER vocabulary (a semantic processor would understand the relationships, an XML processor would flag a validation error (www.w3.org....r/2007/07/)
Moving on, the group also considered the recent discussion that has taken place on the public mailing list concerning the linkage between POWDER and SKOS . The POWDER WG has yet to begin work on Description Resources as such but has noted the outcome of this public discussion and will take it fully into account when the time comes (www.w3.org....r/2007/07/)
Finally, the group recorded a vote of thanks to Kjetil Kjernsmo for his substantial contribution to the POWDER WG and the Content Label Incubator Activity that preceded it (www.w3.org....r/2007/07/)
Machine processability is very important Description Resources have to be machine processable. The question is how much manual work is acceptable or, at least, how much specifically POWDER processing is acceptable? This will be explored on the mailing list in the coming days and weeks. (www.w3.org....r/2007/11/)
But hang on, what about attribution? As the WG members emphasise over and over again, the absolute critical factor in POWDER is that you always know who has made the assertion that a particular thing is true. You canāt decide whether you trust an assertion if you donāt know whoās making it. A classic job for reification (www.w3.org....r/2007/11/)
We will be doing a lot of testing to ensure that standard OWL reasoning does always produce the desired outcome (expect a full Test Suite as part of the POWDER document set) (www.w3.org....r/2007/11/)
There was some discussion about āthe protocol partā. We expect to just use rel="meta" (cf. rel="powder ") on link elements and need to look at services that can return triples about whatever resource includes such a link plus a triple pointing to the full DR data (www.w3.org....r/2007/11/)
Your new pair of kicks squeak like an excited mouse every time you take a step? That's because the materials in the shoes are rubbing together. The Essortment advice says baby powder 's what you need (lifehacker.com....243000.php)
Lift the inner sole of the shoe and sprinkle powder inside. Leave the powder inside as you replace the inner sole. Lift the inner sole partly and dust with baby powder . Wear shoes as you normally would. (lifehacker.com....243000.php)
I'm fairly sure baby powder is either made of talc or cornstarch, depending on the kind you have. So I'd imagine that if you have some cornstarch laying around that might work as well (lifehacker.com....243000.php)
Finally, the group discussed holding a public/press event allied to a face to face meeting in Washington DC in early July. This will allow group members to present their view of POWDER and its potential. (www.w3.org....r/2007/03/)
However, POWDER should support the making of assertions that is, statements whose veracity can be checked by retrieving the resource itself. So one can make a statement such as "all the T-shirts in the drawer are blue", the veracity of which can really only be checked by opening the draw, removing a T-shirt and noting its colou (www.w3.org....r/2007/03/)
Details of the first face to face meeting were discussed. There will be a joint meeting with Mobile Web Best Practices on Thursday 26th April from 14.00 and a full day dedicated to POWDER on Friday 27th. Meetings to be held at Deutsche Telekom's premises in Darmstad (www.w3.org....r/2007/03/)
We then gave some thought to the Primer. Who is it for? What message should it convey? It was agreed that it must inform the reader of what POWDER is for and how to use it but that, of course, it was not meant to duplicate the main specification documents. Work on this will get under way before the end of the year (www.w3.org....r/2007/12/)
The section on efficient data representation (using XML entity declarations etc.) will be moved the the POWDER Primer but will be referred to in the specification document (www.w3.org....r/2007/09/)
All you need to do is sprinkle some of this magical stuff over your floors and sweep it into the cracks; you'll notice a difference as the powder gets worked in (it took my floor about one day to really wow me). — Wendy Boswel (lifehacker.com....246728.php)
|
Home | About | Add URL
Copyright (c) 2000-2009 Gnibo.com, All rights reserved
|
