Kapil wrote:It's like the normal rules of math don't apply to makers of kitchenware. The madness has to stop! Lids don't count as a "piece". Pants aren't sold as "two piece", each leg counting as one. Neither are cars, or airplanes....or really anything except kitchenware.
Not sure if your post is a troll or not, but I'll treat it as if it isn't because I doubt anyone really cares this late in the woot.
Lids are and should most certainly count as a piece because they are separate items. You can buy pots and pans without lids. Also, more complete kitchen sets sometime have lids that go with multiple pans and/or pots.
Your solution would rely on some unspoken convention, whether a pan comes with a lid or not, and whether a pot should, or not. If this current woot was instead interpreted as a 2 piece set as you suggest, then maybe people would complain they expected the pan to come with a lid but didn't receive one. If this was a larger set, sometimes a lid is shared across 2 pots and pan. Is that then a 3 piece set that's missing 2 lids?
Actual count eliminates all this and doesn't rely on what you or I would consider convention but have different definitions of. You seem to consider pans to not include lids by default. Maybe I don't.
As to you side example, a pair of pants are a continuous piece of clothing, typically. They usually aren't 2 separate pieces. The plural and singular form are the same. We use pair to indicate number if needed. Your example doesn't really seem to be relevant in topic, logic, or application to kitchenware.
Yes, I'm no fun at parties. Actually, I lie, I don't go, even if I get invited, and I don't get invited. So in the end, you win. Yay!