text:
namespace blink {
class MediaConstraints;
}  // namespace blink

namespace blink {

MODULES_EXPORT MediaStreamTrackPlatform::FacingMode ToPlatformFacingMode(
    mojom::blink::FacingMode video_facing);

// This is a temporary struct to bridge blink and content mojo types.
struct MODULES_EXPORT VideoInputDeviceCapabilities {
  VideoInputDeviceCapabilities(
      String device_id,
      String group_id,
      const media::VideoCaptureControlSupport& control_support,
      Vector<media::VideoCaptureFormat> formats,
      mojom::blink::FacingMode facing_mode);
  VideoInputDeviceCapabilities();
  VideoInputDeviceCapabilities(VideoInputDeviceCapabilities&& other);
  VideoInputDeviceCapabilities& operator=(VideoInputDeviceCapabilities&& other);
  ~VideoInputDeviceCapabilities();

  String device_id;
  String group_id;
  media::VideoCaptureControlSupport control_support;
  Vector<media::VideoCaptureFormat> formats;
  mojom::blink::FacingMode facing_mode;
};

struct MODULES_EXPORT VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities {
  VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities();
  VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities(VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities&& other);
  ~VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities();
  VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities& operator=(
      VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities&& other);

  // Each capabilities field is independent of each other.
  // TODO(crbug.com/704136): Replace VideoInputDeviceCapabilities in the
  // |device_capabilities| definition with the Blink mojo
  // VideoInputDeviceCapabilitiesPtr type once dependent types are migrated to
  // Blink.
  Vector<VideoInputDeviceCapabilities> device_capabilities;
  Vector<absl::optional<bool>> noise_reduction_capabilities;
};

// This function performs source, source-settings and track-settings selection
// based on the given |capabilities| and |constraints|.
// Chromium performs constraint resolution in two steps. First, a source and its
// settings are selected, then track settings are selected based on the source
// settings. This function implements both steps. Sources are not a user-visible
// concept, so the spec only specifies an algorithm for track settings.
// The algorithm for sources is compatible with the spec algorithm for tracks,
// as defined in https://w3c.github.io/mediacapture-main/#dfn-selectsettings,
// but it is customized to account for differences between sources and tracks,
// and to break ties when multiple source settings are equally good according to
// the spec algorithm.
// In this algorithm, a candidate source is defined as a specific video input
// device opened with a specific resolution and frame rate, together with a
// specific noise-reduction setting.
// The main difference between a source and a track with regards to the spec
// algorithm is that a candidate  source can support a range of values for some
// properties while a candidate track supports a single value. For example,
// cropping and rescaling allows a source with native resolution AxB to support
// the range of resolutions from 1x1 to AxB.
// Only candidates that satisfy the basic constraint set are valid. If no
// candidate can satisfy the basic constraint set, this function returns
// a result without value and with the name of a failed constraint accessible
// via the failed_constraint_name() method. If at least one candidate that
// satisfies the basic constraint set can be found, this function returns a
// result with a valid value.
// If there are no candidates at all, this function returns a result without
// value and an empty failed constraint name.
// The criteria to decide if a valid candidate source (i.e., one that satisfies
// the basic constraint set) is better than another one are as follows: 1. Given
// advanced constraint sets A[0],A[1]...,A[n], candidate C1 is better
//    than candidate C2 if C1 supports the first advanced set for which C1's
//    support is different than C2's support.
//    Examples:
//    * One advanced set, C1 supports it, and C2 does not. C1 is better.
//    * Two sets, C1 supports both, C2 supports only the first. C1 is better.
//    * Three sets, C1 supports the first and second set, C2 supports the first
//      and third set. C1 is better.
// 2. C1 is better than C2 if C1 has a smaller fitness distance than C2. The
//    fitness distance depends on the ability of the candidate to support ideal
//    values in the basic constraint set. This is the final criterion defined in
//    the spec. According to spec, all candidates that share the same fitness
//    distance are equally acceptable, but this implementation has additional
//    criteria to break ties.
// 3. C1 is better than C2 if C1 has a lower Chromium-specific custom distance
//    from the basic constraint set that penalizes the amount of resolution and
//    frame-rate adjustment required to satisfy the range and ideal value
//    specified by width, height and frameRate constraints.
//    For example, if constraints specify a resolution of exactly 1000x1000 for
//    a track, then a candidate with a native resolution of 1200x1200
//    is better than a candidate with a native resolution of 2000x2000. Both
//    settings satisfy the constraint set because rescaling can be used to
//    produce the track setting of 1000x1000, but 1200x1200 is considered better
//    because it has lower resource usage.
// 4. C1 is better than C2 if its settings are closer to certain default
//    settings that include the device ID, noise reduction, resolution,
//    and frame rate, in that order. Note that there is no default facing mode
//    or aspect ratio.
// This function uses the SelectVideoTrackAdapterSettings function to compute
// some track-specific settings. These are available in the returned value via
// the track_adapter_settings() accessor. For more details about the algorithm
// for track adapter settings, see the SelectVideoTrackAdapterSettings
// documentation.
VideoCaptureSettings MODULES_EXPORT SelectSettingsVideoDeviceCapture(
    const VideoDeviceCaptureCapabilities& capabilities,
    const MediaConstraints& constraints,
    int default_width,
    int default_height,
    double default_frame_rate);

}  // namespace blink

#endif  // THIRD_PARTY_BLINK_RENDERER_MODULES_MEDIASTREAM_MEDIA_STREAM_CONSTRAINTS_UTIL_VIDEO_DEVICE_H_


When does my Rhode Island contractor registration expire?
Rhode Island contractor registration cards expire every two years on the first day of the month of issuance. For example, if you received your card on May 15th, 2015, your renewal date is May 1, 2017.
How do I renew my Rhode Island contractor registration?
Where do I find courses to renew my Rhode Island contractor registration?
Builders License Training Institute offers approved online registration renewal courses in a complete 5-hour package or as individual courses. You may purchase courses at any point in your renewal cycle and retain access to them until your renewal date. Courses can be taken 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for your convenience, on any internet capable device. If you have any questions before purchase or while taking your course, the Builders License Training Institute student services staff is available Monday – Friday.
You may purchase courses at any point in your renewal cycle and retain access to them until your renewal date. For your convenience courses can be taken 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, on any internet capable device. If you have questions before purchase or while taking your course, the Builders License Training Institute student services staff is available Monday – Friday.
How do I obtain my course certificates to renew my Rhode Island contractor registration?
Builders License Training Institute will submit your continuing education the next business day after completion. You will be able to download and print certificates for your own records immediately after completing the course.
What happens if my Rhode Island contractor registration expires?
If you do not complete your continuing education and reregister with the board you will be required to pay an additional $35 late fee to renew. Until you renew your registration you will be unable to obtain any permits to build.
This entry was posted in Construction and tagged Rhode Island Contractors, Rhode Island Registration Renewal.


text:
Q: Solr set more relevance in position of string How can I make Solr set more relevance in words based on position of the String.
For example, if I search "Macbook" the firsts results are like "Case Logic LAPS-113 13.3-Inch Laptop / MacBook Air" and after "Apple MacBook Pro MD101LL/A 13.3-Inch ".
This is my field declaration:
<fieldType name="text_pt" class="solr.TextField" positionIncrementGap="100">
    <analyzer type="index">
        <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/>

        <filter class="solr.SynonymFilterFactory" synonyms="lang/index_synonyms.txt" ignoreCase="true" expand="false"/>
        <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" ignoreCase="true" words="lang/stopwords_pt.txt" />
        <filter class="solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory" generateWordParts="1" generateNumberParts="1" catenateWords="1" catenateNumbers="1" catenateAll="0" splitOnCaseChange="0"/>
        <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.KeywordMarkerFilterFactory" protected="lang/protwords_pt.txt"/>
        <filter class="solr.SynonymFilterFactory" synonyms="lang/synonyms.txt" ignoreCase="true" expand="false"/>
    </analyzer>

    <analyzer type="query">
        <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/>

        <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" ignoreCase="true" words="lang/stopwords_pt.txt" />
        <filter class="solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory" generateWordParts="1" generateNumberParts="1" catenateWords="0" catenateNumbers="0" catenateAll="0" splitOnCaseChange="0"/>
        <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/>
        <filter class="solr.KeywordMarkerFilterFactory" protected="lang/protwords_pt.txt"/>
        <filter class="solr.SynonymFilterFactory" synonyms="lang/synonyms.txt" ignoreCase="true" expand="false"/>
    </analyzer>

</fieldType>

A: What if product name was "MacBook/Dell/Lenovo Laptop cheap case", it contains Macbook at first position, you still want to boost this document?
I think you should try to fix the root cause of your issue instead, the common issue of how to deal with accessories (such as 'case', 'battery', 'lock' etc) scoring better than the products themselves.
The obvious best choice: index a field that says if the doc is an accessory (I gather you don't have that info, otherwise this is the best way), and boost the ones that are not accessories.
If you don't have that info, you can try by penalizing the docs that contain 'typical' accessory words. For this you need to build such a list, but it is not hard. I have used this approach with good result.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange