Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Is there a reason this page departs from the I-believe-standard convention to translate the name as “coherence space” rather than “coherent space” (to avoid confusion with spectral topological space / coherent topological space)?
My opinion is that the Wikipedia article cited in coherent space is flawed, both because Girard’s Proofs and Types uses the English “coherence space” (and so does his 1987 Linear Logic article, if I remember correctly), and also because Johnstone’s use, cited in the reference Stone Spaces, is about a completely different concept which is not under discussion. So the WP article is muddled.
My recommendation would be to change from “coherent” to “coherence”, including in the page name, and have a different page for the Johnstone usage.
I don’t have Stone Spaces with me at the moment; is Johnstone’s concept also different from spectral topological space / coherent topological space)?
Mike #3: I don’t have Stone Spaces handy either, but The Point of Pointless Topology seems to indicate that it’s the same concept (page 46 of the article as paginated).
In Johnstone’s Stone Spaces, Section 3.4. (p65), a space is coherent if it is sober and satisfies the conditions in coherent topological space.
Ok, great, and spectral topological space does include sobriety, so it’s all really the same modulo that. Is there a reason to include or exclude sobriety?
Notice that both references currently offered at coherence space instead say (e.g. here) “coherent space” (see also the nForum discussion there) instead of “coherence space”. In fact, Wikipedia here insists that “coherent space” is for the concept in linear logic, and instead redirects the reader interested in topology to “spectral space”.
I see that Max added a brief disambiguation line (here) but this confusing state of affairs would deserve more commentary – at least we’d need one authorative reference which actually says “coherence space” – and best would be to add also the original reference which introduced this terminology (Girard, I gather?)
Oh, I see now that this very point was discussed at the beginning of the thread above.
I have now added in the entry pointer to:
Excellent!
1 to 15 of 15