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.
Huh. I would have thought you’d want to capture the notion of relation rather than the notion of epi-mono factorization.
That is, I would have generalized the notion as a finitely complete category with the property that groupoids are effective, and that pullbacks preserve geometric realizations (or maybe just geometric realizations of groupoids). I actually thought about creating such a stub myself.
Is there a relation between the two different ideas?
It’s not clear whether the in the definition is meant to vary over all , or if just one value of is needed.
Added an actual definition and a reference.
The definition of an exact (∞,1)-category does not belong here, perhaps it should be moved to exact (∞,1)-category?
1 to 5 of 5