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.
Thanks! I have added
a table of contents (so that I can see at a glance what the entry contains);
a mentioning of the word “physics” right at the beginning (to make clear that this is what the entry is about)
a disambiguation line on the very top (there is also universality in mathematics, which is rather different).
Why “term of the art”? Is that just a phrase?
I have added a few more links, also in the tables. But one could add many more.
(Notice, by the way, that usually we have plural versions of entry titles as redirects. So usually you can just put the plural alone in double square brackets.)
The idea sections should be understandable and local metaphors like “term of art” confuse me as well, and probably many other readers. I suggest that the entry be renamed to universality class. Then we can have a separate entry universality which will be a disambiguation entry.
I have separated it. Now we have
I’ve never heard the phrase “term of art” outside of law, nor have I ever heard it with a “the”.
What I find strange about the mentioning of either “jargon” or “term of art” – or any other jargon for jargon ;-) – is that it is hard to see how “universality” is more jargon than, say, “category” or “Lie algebra” or so. I’d just say “universality is the term used for …”.
Urs: I wanted to do the same, but did not want to interfere with phrasing part, we are writing for technical people, hence, in non-extreme cases we do not need to emphasise that our terminology is technical.
Hi Blake,
thanks. Sorry for this, it’s a pretty unimportant point that we kept complaining about. Thanks for the entry. I’ll add a link to universality class now to the main physics-toc. It’s an important concept.
1 to 13 of 13