Re: Ambiguity of |=

Thanks very much, Dave, for the pointer to the newer spec, I will check it
out.

All the best,
Matteo

On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 04:35, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:

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 The slide is out of date, see instead the spec as a CG Report at: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