Re: Ambiguity of |=

Hi Matteo,

The slide is out of date, see instead the spec as a CG Report at:

	https://w3c.github.io/cogai/pkn.html

The includes operator signifies values in an open set, so if there are several such statements you can combine the sets via set-union, noting that the values involved may thus have different likelihoods on account of differences in the metadata for the respective statements. 

p.s. if you have suggestions for improving the wording in the spec, please let us know.

> On 6 Feb 2024, at 17:14, Matteo Bianchetti <mttbnchtt@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear All, 
> 
> I have been continuing reading the cogai material to get up to speed. I have a comment concerning "|=". Maybe my comments is only due to not having learned enough about cogai. Let me know if that is the case.
> 
> Here is my comment. On slide 8 here <https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-DKG-22-Raggett.pdf>, the meaning of "|=" is described as includes. Consider the following example:
> 
>      (1) Flowers-of-England |= Daffodils .
> 
> Using set-theory, (1) could either mean:
>     (2) the set Daffodils is a subset of the set Flowers-of-England 
> or
>     (3) the set Flowers-of-England overlaps with the set Daffodils. 
> 
> In (2), all daffodils are also flowers of England. In (3), some daffodils, but possibly not all, are also flowers of England. 
> 
> I used set-theoretic terms to make the distinction evident, but the ambiguity is not due to set-theory (I could express it also without referring to sets).
> 
> Suggestion: make the description of "|=" clearer (e.g. choose between is-subset-of and overlaps).
> 
> 
> Thanks very much,
> Matteo
> 
> P.S. Is it better to raise issues like this here or on the issue tracker on GitHub?
> 
> 

Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>