Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
   • CommentTimeSep 21st 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Andrew Stacey
   Format: MarkdownItexOkay, this isn't *strictly* nLab-related, but it's close. I'm using an Instiki installation for a course that I'm teaching and just created a page with a proof. Since the students aren't used to reading proofs, I've added a commentary. I wondered what people here thought of the layout (since we've talked about CSS and design from time to time). The page is at: <http://mathsnotes.math.ntnu.no/mathsnotes/show/completeness+of+space+of+continuous+functions+on+the+interval>

   Okay, this isn’t strictly nLab-related, but it’s close. I’m using an Instiki installation for a course that I’m teaching and just created a page with a proof. Since the students aren’t used to reading proofs, I’ve added a commentary. I wondered what people here thought of the layout (since we’ve talked about CSS and design from time to time). The page is at:

   http://mathsnotes.math.ntnu.no/mathsnotes/show/completeness+of+space+of+continuous+functions+on+the+interval

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
   • CommentTimeSep 21st 2011
   • (edited Sep 21st 2011)
   • PermaLink
   Author: TobyBartels
   Format: MarkdownItexI like it! I fixed a few typos (one of which was mathematically significant, although only in a right-hand explanation). Also (which is not quite the same thing) I added braces around every instance of an absolute value or norm, which helps iTeX help MathML with the spacing. And I added another proof explanation, since I thought that it might be helpful, although obviously I won't feel bad if you take it back out.

   I like it!

   I fixed a few typos (one of which was mathematically significant, although only in a right-hand explanation). Also (which is not quite the same thing) I added braces around every instance of an absolute value or norm, which helps iTeX help MathML with the spacing. And I added another proof explanation, since I thought that it might be helpful, although obviously I won’t feel bad if you take it back out.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeSep 21st 2011
   • (edited Sep 21st 2011)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI like that you have thereby explained to my how to code such fancy right-hand comments! :-)

   I like that you have thereby explained to my how to code such fancy right-hand comments! :-)

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
   • CommentTimeSep 21st 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Andrew Stacey
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks, Toby. I didn't know about the grouping and absolute value/norms. I'd noticed that they didn't look right, but now I know how to fix them. I got a suggestion from someone (another mathematician, not a student) that the comments should be "click to reveal", like the contents. After playing with CSS a little, I have an example: <http://mathsnotes.math.ntnu.no/mathsnotes/show/Sandbox> Quick poll (of anyone interested): which do you prefer? The click-to-reveal or the always-visible. Of course, various bits can be tweaked - maybe it's overkill to have "hover to reveal, click to hold" on *every* comment.

   Thanks, Toby.

   I didn’t know about the grouping and absolute value/norms. I’d noticed that they didn’t look right, but now I know how to fix them.

   I got a suggestion from someone (another mathematician, not a student) that the comments should be “click to reveal”, like the contents. After playing with CSS a little, I have an example:

   http://mathsnotes.math.ntnu.no/mathsnotes/show/Sandbox

   Quick poll (of anyone interested): which do you prefer? The click-to-reveal or the always-visible. Of course, various bits can be tweaked - maybe it’s overkill to have “hover to reveal, click to hold” on every comment.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
   • CommentTimeSep 21st 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: TobyBartels
   Format: MarkdownItexI suppose that this depends on the course. I got the impression from these comments that this course is likely to be the first real proofs course of many of your students, that this is why you're making all of these comments. If this is so, then I suggest to keep them visible.

   I suppose that this depends on the course. I got the impression from these comments that this course is likely to be the first real proofs course of many of your students, that this is why you’re making all of these comments. If this is so, then I suggest to keep them visible.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
   • CommentTimeSep 22nd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: DavidRoberts
   Format: MarkdownItexWith the hidden comments, it may be difficult to determine which comments and which steps go together. And when things pop up and pop down again as one is looking for the right comment for the step under examination it could get a little confusing. The whitespace in my opinion is good, and it makes people slow down and consider each step.

   With the hidden comments, it may be difficult to determine which comments and which steps go together. And when things pop up and pop down again as one is looking for the right comment for the step under examination it could get a little confusing. The whitespace in my opinion is good, and it makes people slow down and consider each step.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
   • CommentTimeSep 22nd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Andrew Stacey
   Format: MarkdownItexOkay, I'm convinced. I'll leave the comments visible. I've tweaked the CSS a bit to make it easier to input. Now there are just two classes `.commentedProof` on the proof environment and `.comment` for the comments themselves. (**Note:** these are not in the nLab CSS so don't try them here.) Toby, I noticed a small error in your addition! The function is only defined on $[0,1]$, not $\mathbb{R}$. Having corrected that, I'm leaving the comment in - the general definition of continuous function is very new to the students, and I've glossed over the difference between "continuous" and "continuous at $x$" a little in lectures.

   Okay, I’m convinced. I’ll leave the comments visible.

   I’ve tweaked the CSS a bit to make it easier to input. Now there are just two classes .commentedProof on the proof environment and .comment for the comments themselves. (Note: these are not in the nLab CSS so don’t try them here.)

   Toby, I noticed a small error in your addition! The function is only defined on $[0,1]$, not $\mathbb{R}$. Having corrected that, I’m leaving the comment in - the general definition of continuous function is very new to the students, and I’ve glossed over the difference between “continuous” and “continuous at $x$” a little in lectures.