Re: Proposal for representing Aggregate Statistical Data

Danbri
You are missing the point of this thread (sorry just seen this emai)

There is no complaint about Dagstuhl being made
Please read carefully from the beginning, if you are interested-

The point is that people who read about the workshop through the report
are misinformed, about KG and about a bunch of other things

The complaint is about poor research direction and poor information about
the
state of the art in the research direction in KR, etc etc. This is painful
but true.

What is the point of having workshop reports published, if they dont tell
the truth
or even in the case when they just report the abstracts, these are painfully
superficial and inadequate to represent the state of the art and research
challenges, etc etc etc
Cheers

PDM


On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 8:59 PM Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 at 11:04, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 28/06/2019 03:22, Michael Andrews wrote:
>>
>> The naming of a type as StatisticalPopulation makes sense when talking
>> about people (or possibly other living things) with respect to a location
>> -- the focus of DataCommons.org.  There are of course many other kinds of
>> statistical data not focused on human characteristics that in the public
>> domain, relating to manufacturing production, air quality, road haulage,
>> etc.  When reporting about non-living phenomenon, the term
>> StatisticalPopulation doesn't sound right.
>>
>> Hello Michael,
>>
>> The term Statistical Population is used in statistics for any group, or
>> notional group, on which measurements are made or from which a sample is
>> drawn so that measurements can be made, see
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_population
>>
> Thanks - exactly. Since we are using the statistical terminology, and many
> readers won't have encountered it, we ought to link to that Wikipedia entry
> or similar to provide more context/background.
>
> Dan
>