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.
As there had been a change to the entry for Ross Street I gave it a glance. Is there a reason that the second reference is to a paper without Ross as an author?I hesitate to delete it as there may be a hidden reason. (I have edited this discussion entry to remedy the point that Todd and Urs have made below. I also edited the title of this discussion!)
Ross who? Street? Or is Ross a last name?
Tim means the entry Ross Street.
The change that he refers to is revision 6 by Mike, which corrected the first name of Kelly mentioned in the first sentence.
The second in the list of references that Tim is wondering about is
(Tim, we could at some point publish a compilation, “Porter’s URL riddles – or: can you guess the link that I am thinking of?” ;-)
That could be linked to Andrew’s references to British humour, David Roberts to Goons, Pythons etc. … and, Urs, what would you offer to this list of delights?
I am afraid that I know so few category theorists whose name is Ross that I did not feel it necessary to give the full name.. Mea culpa! The given references to Ross Street’s work are few considering the impact that he has had. (however we do give his publication list via a link.)
I did not feel it necessary to give the full name..
The thing is, even if we can guess part of what you have in mind, it is still not always clear precisely which URL you would like us to look at.
I vividly remember – if I may recall that – the first times that I was following your non-links to your “Menagerie”. I knew it existed. I was determined to find it. Still, it was a tough riddle. :-)
And thanks to Andrew, here on the forum it couldn’t be more easy to provide a link: just type the word “Ross Street” with two square brackets around it. That costs you virtually nothing and ensures that virtually everybody who will see your message knows what you are talking about.
That I knew. I was just being lazy!!!! or rather in a bit of a hurry.
What I have forgotten is how (if possible) one renames the discussion to give the full name.
On a practical level, should that third reference at Ross Street be deleted? Anyone object? It does look as if it is a copy and paste that went slightly wrong!
What I have forgotten is how (if possible) one renames the discussion to give the full name.
Hit “edit” on the first entry. That opens up the edit pane for the title again.
Concerning that reference: it looks to me like you are right that it should not be there. You can check from the history who added it and ask him difrectly.
I have deleted that reference. Here it is in case anyone thinks it should be there:
(I think it was Zoran who did the initial edit so the above is addressed to him in particular.)
If there is a puzzle with André Joyal, I would go to his entry, Andre Joyal, and observe that a chunk of references, mainly with Street, was pasted from there to Ross Street.
Thanks, Zoran. That was what I thought had happened.
While we’re on the subject, I’m curious how Kelly’s first name came to be incorrect.
Mike, I don’t quite follow. Why do you say ’incorrect’? Everyone knew him as “Max” of course. Similarly, my brother’s correct full name is Robert Lincoln Trimble, Jr., but everyone knows him as “Linc”.
I mean, why did the nLab page say “George Maxwell Kelly” instead of “Gregory Maxwell Kelly”?
It says ’Gregory’ now, on Ross Street and Max Kelly.
Sorry, I guess #14 is something you already know, since you changed it a while back.
[deleted]
happening upon this page due to the edits at orientals, I noticed that the first sentence seemed odd – apart from the big broken link it contained.
I have reworded, in particular I have replaced “category theory” by “higher category theory”.
A multifaced outlook on descent theory including elements of higher descent
I would call it: “exploring how classical concepts of descent theory might be cast into the stricter context of strict -categories”. But we had this discussion already a decade ago. I suggest to link this article by RS with the discussion in Verity on descent for strict omega-groupoid valued presheaves
Surely, Urs, I agree with putting into Verity context, I forgot about this. I put the multifacedness as there are so many other things like aspects of torsors from the point of view of discrete cofibrations, stacks, then say Azumaya algebras. The paper is really rich, though also somewhat vague, missing lots of would-be useful details.
On the other hand, I agree that the sentence on his contributions should have better balanced emphasis on various aspects (i support your call for somebody more competent to complete with better emphasis). However one can not exclude descent from major contributions, have in mind his pioneering work on Grothendieck 2-toposes, on internal fibrations, on descent and codescent from 2-categorical (limits) point of view, formal 2-monad theory clearing the meaning of Kleisli and Eilenberg-Moore constructions, introducing internal fibrations in bicategories and so on, strictification constructions on lax functors etc. all very relevant for modern descent/stack theory and most of these far predating exciting unifications in 2000s.
What I mean is: You are not doing X a favor if you write “X made important contribution to topic Y” unless the generic Y-theorist shares this assessment. In any case, it would be more useful not to just claim unspecified importance but to indicate the actual content of the work. For instance, state the actual result: “X proved the A-conjecture in Y-theory”, or the like.
In fact, in one of his partly autobiographical texts (on history of australian school of category theory) he outs some ideas in (nonabealian) homological algebra, e.g. understanding issues with factor systems (Schreier’s theory) as the ideas which lead him into the category theory from the very beginning with his early interest on the boundary of questions on what looks to me as algebraic topology.
24 I agree. But I am not doing favor to anybody; i never met a person with name Ross Street and have only intellectual interest in his work.
Started a collected writings section listing Ross Street’s publications, in the order as listed on his webpage. So far have completed 0 - 36, which covers publications from 1968 - 1989. Every reference has a DOI where possible, if not, a URL or PDF.
I will return later to complete the remaining references.
Added publications 36 - 71 to the Collected writings section based on the numbering on Ross Street’s website, covering the years 1990 - 2002. All works should have a DOI if it exists.
Some omissions include: 54 (with D. Verity) Surface diagrams for tricategories, and 62 (with P.J. Freyd, P.W. O’Hearn, A.J. Power, M. Takeyama, and R.D. Tennent) Bireflectivity; the former doesn’t seem to exist, and the latter doesn’t appear to have Street as an author. I also couldn’t find any official publication data for 61 (with Renato Betti and Dietmar Schumacher) Factorizations in bicategories, so I have just included a link to the draft pdf on Street’s website.
More to come in the near future.
Thanks again for all this work!
I have made the link to R. Gordon come out by making it redirect to Robert Gordon.
(I think best practice in our time and age is to abbreviate author names as little as possible to make future name clashes less likely.)
On the other hand, the Gordon, Power & Street reference is now duplicated in this entry anyways (first it appears with indication and link concerning its contents, next it appears again in the list you have been creating). (Not that it’s a problem, just saying.)
Re. 28:
and the latter doesn’t appear to have Street as an author
As far as I can see, it does have Street as an author: Bireflectivity.
Re. 30:
Thanks for this, I will add it to the page! Somehow I stubbled onto this paper instead, which has 5 of the same authors, the same title, published four years earlier in a journal with almost the same name:
Re. 29:
I agree that we should abbreviate author names as little as possible; I have been merely taking the data from the publisher’s website and did not want to introduce any errors by extrapolating first names from an initial.
Somehow I stubbled onto this paper instead, which has 5 of the same authors, the same title, published four years earlier in a journal with almost the same name:
That is really rather odd. It looks like the same paper (except for the omission of Street). I wonder what happened there.
Added publication data in Collected writings for references 72 to 107 as listed on Street’s webpage, which covers the years 2003 - 2011.
Omissions include 82 and 84 (which are “in preparation”) and 91 On centres and lax centres for promonoidal categories which doesn’t appear to be officially published and the link on Street’s website to the PDF was broken. If someone could find it, that would be great.
Only one more round (107 - 142) and this section should be done.
@Bryce
An abstract of Street’s #91paper is available on page 191 of http://www.numdam.org/item/CTGDC_2005__46_3_163_0.pdf
Aha, Elango uploaded it to ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268619883_On_centres_and_lax_centres_for_promonoidal_categories!
Completed the Collected writings section with papers 108 - 142 as listed on Ross Street’s website, which covers the years from 2011 to the present (2023).
Omissions include numbers: 108 and 141, which are not published.
I hope this list useful proves useful for anyone searching for these references in the future.
p.s. I number of Ross’s more recent publications also appear on the arXiv (about 45). I have not included these links in the reference list, but if someone is willing to add them I think this would be a really good idea, especially for the closed-access publications.
1 to 38 of 38