manifest（）
查看答案
相关试题
换一换
manifest（）
答案
Why is Rose considered a good instance to manifest "extreme reading" ?
答案
英译汉：“cargo manifest”，正确的翻译为：（ ）。
A.报关单 B.载货清单 C.中国强制认证 D.空舱证书
答案
下列哪一项是manifest文件的功能（）
A.声明要求的最低API级别 B.声明要求的用户权限的级别 C.记录程序中使用的Activity等资源 D.A、B、C选项都是
答案
HTML5的Manifest文件中，NETWORK的作用是（）
答案
Inflectional morphemes manifest various grammatical relations or grammatical categories such as number, tense, degree, and case.
答案
You deployed a Java EE Shared Library and want to use it from an application that is also deployed on the same cluster. Which two manifest attributes must be specified at a minimum with corresponding values in the deployment descriptor of the application that requires?（）
A.Implementation-Version B.Specification-Version C.xtension-Name D.Specification-Vendor E.Implementation-Vendor
答案
请阅读短文，完成此题。Julia, Gillard, as education minister and then prime minister~ identified the Gonski Report on school funding, later renamed the Better School Plan, as one of her crowning achievements. Backed by the Australian Education Union and Australia"s cultural-left education blob (a term coined by Britain"s Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove), her argument is that Gonski will deliver excellence and equity in education by massively increasing government expenditure. The Gonski funding model, involving a base level of funding known as a School Resourcing Standard and additional loadings related to disadvantage, is also lauded as bring clarity, transparency and consistency to school funding. Not so. As noted by the National Comission of Audit, the flaws and weaknesses in the report are manifest.Under the heading "Complexity of the funding model," section 9.7 Appendix Volmne 1, the statement is made that" new school funding arrangements are complex, inconsistent and lack transparency". Instead of having a national funding model, we have a situation where the states and territories and Catholic and independent school sectors have their own approaches to allocating finding to schools.So much for the argument that the Gonski model represents an improvement on the Howard government"s supposedly opaque and insistently applied socio-economic status (SES) mode. The Schooling Resource Standard is also criticized for not being "based on a detailed analysisof the cost of delivering education" and the formula employed for quantifying disadvantage for using faulty data leading to students "being misidentified as being inside or outside definitions of educationally disadvantaged".Citing international research and an analysis carried out by the ALP federal .member forFraser, Andrew Leigh, when an academic at the Australian National University, the audit report oncludes there is little, if any, relationship between increased expenditure and
A.It would bring efficiency to school funding B.It would raise standards and equity in education C.It would reduce government budget in school funding D.It would control both the stale schools and independent schools
答案
请阅读短文，完成此题。Julia, Gillard, as education minister and then prime minister~ identified the Gonski Report on school funding, later renamed the Better School Plan, as one of her crowning achievements. Backed by the Australian Education Union and Australia"s cultural-left education blob (a term coined by Britain"s Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove), her argument is that Gonski will deliver excellence and equity in education by massively increasing government expenditure. The Gonski funding model, involving a base level of funding known as a School Resourcing Standard and additional loadings related to disadvantage, is also lauded as bring clarity, transparency and consistency to school funding. Not so. As noted by the National Comission of Audit, the flaws and weaknesses in the report are manifest.Under the heading "Complexity of the funding model," section 9.7 Appendix Volmne 1, the statement is made that" new school funding arrangements are complex, inconsistent and lack transparency". Instead of having a national funding model, we have a situation where the states and territories and Catholic and independent school sectors have their own approaches to allocating finding to schools.So much for the argument that the Gonski model represents an improvement on the Howard government"s supposedly opaque and insistently applied socio-economic status (SES) mode. The Schooling Resource Standard is also criticized for not being "based on a detailed analysisof the cost of delivering education" and the formula employed for quantifying disadvantage for using faulty data leading to students "being misidentified as being inside or outside definitions of educationally disadvantaged".Citing international research and an analysis carried out by the ALP federal .member forFraser, Andrew Leigh, when an academic at the Australian National University, the audit report oncludes there is little, if any, relationship between increased expenditure and
A.He cites noted authorities as a means of supporting his opinions B.He presents a thesis and then lists evidence to supporting his opinions C.He summarized an official document and then discusses it in detail D.He uses official documents and then gives his personal interpretation
答案
请阅读短文，完成此题。Julia, Gillard, as education minister and then prime minister~ identified the Gonski Report on school funding, later renamed the Better School Plan, as one of her crowning achievements. Backed by the Australian Education Union and Australia"s cultural-left education blob (a term coined by Britain"s Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove), her argument is that Gonski will deliver excellence and equity in education by massively increasing government expenditure. The Gonski funding model, involving a base level of funding known as a School Resourcing Standard and additional loadings related to disadvantage, is also lauded as bring clarity, transparency and consistency to school funding. Not so. As noted by the National Comission of Audit, the flaws and weaknesses in the report are manifest.Under the heading "Complexity of the funding model," section 9.7 Appendix Volmne 1, the statement is made that" new school funding arrangements are complex, inconsistent and lack transparency". Instead of having a national funding model, we have a situation where the states and territories and Catholic and independent school sectors have their own approaches to allocating finding to schools.So much for the argument that the Gonski model represents an improvement on the Howard government"s supposedly opaque and insistently applied socio-economic status (SES) mode. The Schooling Resource Standard is also criticized for not being "based on a detailed analysisof the cost of delivering education" and the formula employed for quantifying disadvantage for using faulty data leading to students "being misidentified as being inside or outside definitions of educationally disadvantaged".Citing international research and an analysis carried out by the ALP federal .member forFraser, Andrew Leigh, when an academic at the Australian National University, the audit report oncludes there is little, if any, relationship between increased expenditure and
A.Needed: a Better Model for Education B.Gonski: the Advantages and Disadvantages C.Needed: a Better Model for Funding Schools D.Gonski: a Funding Model Favored by the Prime Minister
答案
热门试题
请阅读短文，完成此题。Julia, Gillard, as education minister and then prime minister~ identified the Gonski Report on school funding, later renamed the Better School Plan, as one of her crowning achievements. Backed by the Australian Education Union and Australia"s cultural-left education blob (a term coined by Britain"s Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove), her argument is that Gonski will deliver excellence and equity in education by massively increasing government expenditure. The Gonski funding model, involving a base level of funding known as a School Resourcing Standard and additional loadings related to disadvantage, is also lauded as bring clarity, transparency and consistency to school funding. Not so. As noted by the National Comission of Audit, the flaws and weaknesses in the report are manifest.Under the heading "Complexity of the funding model," section 9.7 Appendix Volmne 1, the statement is made that" new school funding arrangements are complex, inconsistent and lack transparency". Instead of having a national funding model, we have a situation where the states and territories and Catholic and independent school sectors have their own approaches to allocating finding to schools.So much for the argument that the Gonski model represents an improvement on the Howard government"s supposedly opaque and insistently applied socio-economic status (SES) mode. The Schooling Resource Standard is also criticized for not being "based on a detailed analysisof the cost of delivering education" and the formula employed for quantifying disadvantage for using faulty data leading to students "being misidentified as being inside or outside definitions of educationally disadvantaged".Citing international research and an analysis carried out by the ALP federal .member forFraser, Andrew Leigh, when an academic at the Australian National University, the audit report oncludes there is little, if any, relationship between increased expenditure and
请阅读短文，完成此题。Julia, Gillard, as education minister and then prime minister~ identified the Gonski Report on school funding, later renamed the Better School Plan, as one of her crowning achievements. Backed by the Australian Education Union and Australia"s cultural-left education blob (a term coined by Britain"s Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove), her argument is that Gonski will deliver excellence and equity in education by massively increasing government expenditure. The Gonski funding model, involving a base level of funding known as a School Resourcing Standard and additional loadings related to disadvantage, is also lauded as bring clarity, transparency and consistency to school funding. Not so. As noted by the National Comission of Audit, the flaws and weaknesses in the report are manifest.Under the heading "Complexity of the funding model," section 9.7 Appendix Volmne 1, the statement is made that" new school funding arrangements are complex, inconsistent and lack transparency". Instead of having a national funding model, we have a situation where the states and territories and Catholic and independent school sectors have their own approaches to allocating finding to schools.So much for the argument that the Gonski model represents an improvement on the Howard government"s supposedly opaque and insistently applied socio-economic status (SES) mode. The Schooling Resource Standard is also criticized for not being "based on a detailed analysisof the cost of delivering education" and the formula employed for quantifying disadvantage for using faulty data leading to students "being misidentified as being inside or outside definitions of educationally disadvantaged".Citing international research and an analysis carried out by the ALP federal .member forFraser, Andrew Leigh, when an academic at the Australian National University, the audit report oncludes there is little, if any, relationship between increased expenditure and
Text 2 The UK government"s decision to shutter plans to build the world"s first tidal lagoon off Swansea Bay is a hard blow for Wales.The tidal lagoon project,had it gone ahead,was expected to create 2,200 jobs,plus more in the supply chain.These are the kinds of jobs that Wales,so damaged by steel and coal closures,needs.But the business secretary,Greg Clark,has decided the country can"t have them because they would be too expensive.Welsh politicians have reacted with understandable fury to Mr Clark"s announcement,which comes almost exactly 12 months after the government abandoned plans to electrify the railway from Cardiff to Swansea,and just a day after Member of Parliament（MPs）voted to press ahead with another expensive infrastructure project:a third runway at Heathrow.There are some rational reasons to approve of this week"s decision,while regretting its consequences.No one,including the Tidal Lagoon Power company,denied that the electricity produced off the Welsh coast would have cost more than the cheapest renewables,The most recent government auctions saw offshore wind schemes win contracts at record lows of￡57.50 per megawatt hour,meaning they are within a few pounds of being subsidy-free.But cost is not the only consideration.Otherwise,the government would never have gone ahead with the hugely expensive,risky and uncertain Hinkley Point C nuclear power station.Nor would it have cut subsidies for solar power and onshore wind,as it did in 2015.Those decisions-particularly the promise to curb onshore wind,as the Conservatives did in their 2015 manifest0,despite poll after poll showing that a majority of the public prefers wind and solar to nuclear-were ideological.In a City speech this March,Mr Clark praised business for putting"evidence before ideology".It is welcome that the secretary of state says this is his own approach.Too many of his Conservative colleagues remain too strongly attached to fossil fuels,inclu"ding the prospect of a whole new shale gas industry.As the price of renewables continues to fall,they will surely lose the argument.With Mr Clark in charge,the hope is that onshore wind and solar subsidies may soon return-though too late for UK companies that could have developed and profited from the technology had we not given up on it long before the renewables boom.Yet the government is planning more nuclear power stations,including one in Wales.Different rules seem to apply for different technologies.It looks like a Tory government in Westminster snubbed Welsh Labour"s pet project.Backers of the tidal project felt shut out by ministers.Wave energy lobbyists perhaps don"t have the firepower in Whitehall that others can muster.Mr Clark might have relied on the evidence to make a tough call not to back a new,green technology.But it"s hard to shake off the impression that the decision was one rooted in the partisan politics of self-interest.Which of the following is true o[Hinkley Point C,according to Paragraph 4?
Text 2 The UK government"s decision to shutter plans to build the world"s first tidal lagoon off Swansea Bay is a hard blow for Wales.The tidal lagoon project,had it gone ahead,was expected to create 2,200 jobs,plus more in the supply chain.These are the kinds of jobs that Wales,so damaged by steel and coal closures,needs.But the business secretary,Greg Clark,has decided the country can"t have them because they would be too expensive.Welsh politicians have reacted with understandable fury to Mr Clark"s announcement,which comes almost exactly 12 months after the government abandoned plans to electrify the railway from Cardiff to Swansea,and just a day after Member of Parliament（MPs）voted to press ahead with another expensive infrastructure project:a third runway at Heathrow.There are some rational reasons to approve of this week"s decision,while regretting its consequences.No one,including the Tidal Lagoon Power company,denied that the electricity produced off the Welsh coast would have cost more than the cheapest renewables,The most recent government auctions saw offshore wind schemes win contracts at record lows of￡57.50 per megawatt hour,meaning they are within a few pounds of being subsidy-free.But cost is not the only consideration.Otherwise,the government would never have gone ahead with the hugely expensive,risky and uncertain Hinkley Point C nuclear power station.Nor would it have cut subsidies for solar power and onshore wind,as it did in 2015.Those decisions-particularly the promise to curb onshore wind,as the Conservatives did in their 2015 manifest0,despite poll after poll showing that a majority of the public prefers wind and solar to nuclear-were ideological.In a City speech this March,Mr Clark praised business for putting"evidence before ideology".It is welcome that the secretary of state says this is his own approach.Too many of his Conservative colleagues remain too strongly attached to fossil fuels,inclu"ding the prospect of a whole new shale gas industry.As the price of renewables continues to fall,they will surely lose the argument.With Mr Clark in charge,the hope is that onshore wind and solar subsidies may soon return-though too late for UK companies that could have developed and profited from the technology had we not given up on it long before the renewables boom.Yet the government is planning more nuclear power stations,including one in Wales.Different rules seem to apply for different technologies.It looks like a Tory government in Westminster snubbed Welsh Labour"s pet project.Backers of the tidal project felt shut out by ministers.Wave energy lobbyists perhaps don"t have the firepower in Whitehall that others can muster.Mr Clark might have relied on the evidence to make a tough call not to back a new,green technology.But it"s hard to shake off the impression that the decision was one rooted in the partisan politics of self-interest.The author holds that many UK companies missed the chance to develop partly due to_____.
Text 2 The UK government"s decision to shutter plans to build the world"s first tidal lagoon off Swansea Bay is a hard blow for Wales.The tidal lagoon project,had it gone ahead,was expected to create 2,200 jobs,plus more in the supply chain.These are the kinds of jobs that Wales,so damaged by steel and coal closures,needs.But the business secretary,Greg Clark,has decided the country can"t have them because they would be too expensive.Welsh politicians have reacted with understandable fury to Mr Clark"s announcement,which comes almost exactly 12 months after the government abandoned plans to electrify the railway from Cardiff to Swansea,and just a day after Member of Parliament（MPs）voted to press ahead with another expensive infrastructure project:a third runway at Heathrow.There are some rational reasons to approve of this week"s decision,while regretting its consequences.No one,including the Tidal Lagoon Power company,denied that the electricity produced off the Welsh coast would have cost more than the cheapest renewables,The most recent government auctions saw offshore wind schemes win contracts at record lows of￡57.50 per megawatt hour,meaning they are within a few pounds of being subsidy-free.But cost is not the only consideration.Otherwise,the government would never have gone ahead with the hugely expensive,risky and uncertain Hinkley Point C nuclear power station.Nor would it have cut subsidies for solar power and onshore wind,as it did in 2015.Those decisions-particularly the promise to curb onshore wind,as the Conservatives did in their 2015 manifest0,despite poll after poll showing that a majority of the public prefers wind and solar to nuclear-were ideological.In a City speech this March,Mr Clark praised business for putting"evidence before ideology".It is welcome that the secretary of state says this is his own approach.Too many of his Conservative colleagues remain too strongly attached to fossil fuels,inclu"ding the prospect of a whole new shale gas industry.As the price of renewables continues to fall,they will surely lose the argument.With Mr Clark in charge,the hope is that onshore wind and solar subsidies may soon return-though too late for UK companies that could have developed and profited from the technology had we not given up on it long before the renewables boom.Yet the government is planning more nuclear power stations,including one in Wales.Different rules seem to apply for different technologies.It looks like a Tory government in Westminster snubbed Welsh Labour"s pet project.Backers of the tidal project felt shut out by ministers.Wave energy lobbyists perhaps don"t have the firepower in Whitehall that others can muster.Mr Clark might have relied on the evidence to make a tough call not to back a new,green technology.But it"s hard to shake off the impression that the decision was one rooted in the partisan politics of self-interest.Paragraph 3 mentions offshore wind schemes to_____
Text 2 The UK government"s decision to shutter plans to build the world"s first tidal lagoon off Swansea Bay is a hard blow for Wales.The tidal lagoon project,had it gone ahead,was expected to create 2,200 jobs,plus more in the supply chain.These are the kinds of jobs that Wales,so damaged by steel and coal closures,needs.But the business secretary,Greg Clark,has decided the country can"t have them because they would be too expensive.Welsh politicians have reacted with understandable fury to Mr Clark"s announcement,which comes almost exactly 12 months after the government abandoned plans to electrify the railway from Cardiff to Swansea,and just a day after Member of Parliament（MPs）voted to press ahead with another expensive infrastructure project:a third runway at Heathrow.There are some rational reasons to approve of this week"s decision,while regretting its consequences.No one,including the Tidal Lagoon Power company,denied that the electricity produced off the Welsh coast would have cost more than the cheapest renewables,The most recent government auctions saw offshore wind schemes win contracts at record lows of￡57.50 per megawatt hour,meaning they are within a few pounds of being subsidy-free.But cost is not the only consideration.Otherwise,the government would never have gone ahead with the hugely expensive,risky and uncertain Hinkley Point C nuclear power station.Nor would it have cut subsidies for solar power and onshore wind,as it did in 2015.Those decisions-particularly the promise to curb onshore wind,as the Conservatives did in their 2015 manifest0,despite poll after poll showing that a majority of the public prefers wind and solar to nuclear-were ideological.In a City speech this March,Mr Clark praised business for putting"evidence before ideology".It is welcome that the secretary of state says this is his own approach.Too many of his Conservative colleagues remain too strongly attached to fossil fuels,inclu"ding the prospect of a whole new shale gas industry.As the price of renewables continues to fall,they will surely lose the argument.With Mr Clark in charge,the hope is that onshore wind and solar subsidies may soon return-though too late for UK companies that could have developed and profited from the technology had we not given up on it long before the renewables boom.Yet the government is planning more nuclear power stations,including one in Wales.Different rules seem to apply for different technologies.It looks like a Tory government in Westminster snubbed Welsh Labour"s pet project.Backers of the tidal project felt shut out by ministers.Wave energy lobbyists perhaps don"t have the firepower in Whitehall that others can muster.Mr Clark might have relied on the evidence to make a tough call not to back a new,green technology.But it"s hard to shake off the impression that the decision was one rooted in the partisan politics of self-interest.The author"s attitude toward the government"s decision on wave energy seems to be one of____
使用微信扫一扫登录
