# Start a new discussion

## Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

## Site Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

• CommentRowNumber1.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010

• CommentRowNumber2.
• CommentAuthorzskoda
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010

• CommentRowNumber3.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010
• (edited Jul 26th 2010)

By linear operad I mean enriched in vector spaces. As in “linear category”.

• CommentRowNumber4.
• CommentAuthorzskoda
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010

OK you call it enriched, operads are usually said in (operad in Top = topological operad). I am happy with that. But this is as I pointed above not in accordance to the main statement you quote that its cofibrant resolution is the L-infinity operad. This is true in the model category of dg-operads, not the operads (enriched) in Vec.

• CommentRowNumber5.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010
• (edited Jul 26th 2010)

But operads in $Vect$ sit inside the category of operads in chain complexes, where the resolution takes place.

Just as an operad in sets is resolved after regarding it under the canonical embedding as an operad in topological spaces.

• CommentRowNumber6.
• CommentAuthorzskoda
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010
• (edited Jul 26th 2010)

Forgetting to say the embedding means being sloppy about the true identity. If you identify a Set operad with extending it Top-operad to be able to resolve it, than in truth you are considering it as a Top-operad to start with. It can be embedded in many other setups with different resolutions. In nlab we should be free from various local jargons and assuming microlocal conventions.

• CommentRowNumber7.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010

sure, go ahead and add the details. This is not the only issue that the stub entry didn’t go into…

• CommentRowNumber8.
• CommentAuthorzskoda
• CommentTimeJul 26th 2010

check