Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

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

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

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 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 limit 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 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 subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

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

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    There has been a discussion about good practice with theorem numbering, particularly in light of a certain bug, under regular elements in a Heyting algebra. I’m moving it here.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012
    • (edited Mar 14th 2012)

    Urs wrote:

    I have a general suggestion: let’s use

          +-- {: .num_remark}
    

    and similar by default. That’s more useful when an entry grows. (And all entries will grow eventually…)

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    Todd_Trimble wrote:

    I think that’s a good suggestion, Urs (and I’ve begun doing that, but not consistently).

    I’d like to propose another suggestion: when including redirects, make a point of including plural forms. That way a link can be made directly from the plural, without extra fuss.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    Mike Shulman wrote:

    If we do use numbered theorem environements, I think we should always also include an anchor name:

    +-- {: .num_remark #MyRemark}
    

    IIRC there is an instiki bug that rears its head when some, but not all, of the numbered theorems on a given page have anchor names assigned.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    Urs wrote:

    Yes, very true.

    On the other hand, maybe there is hope that this bug will disappear some day? I keep liking the idea that the software helps me save time, instead of me having to invest time to work around it…

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012
    • (edited Mar 14th 2012)

    Mike Shulman wrote:

    *shrug* Don’t ask me.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    TobyBartels wrote:

    Bug or no bug, there’s not much point to numbering the theorems/remarks/etc if you can’t refer to them later by number. And the only safe way to do that is with the anchors.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    Urs wrote:

    Bug or no bug, there’s not much point to numbering the theorems/remarks/etc if you can’t refer to them later by number. And the only safe way to do that is with the anchors.

    That’s what we currently do anyway, being forced by the bug: if I want to refer to something by number, I need to anchor everything in between in order for the numbers to come out right.

    But what I am hesitant (no: unwilling) to do is to preemptively think up anchor names for everything in sight even before I refer to a single one. It would be good, I agree, but there is some limit being reached here.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    TobyBartels wrote:

    But what I am hesitant (no: unwilling) to do is to preemptively think up anchor names for everything in sight even before I refer to a single one.

    Me too. But in that case, I just leave them unnumbered until I decide that I wish to refer to them.

    I agree, the bug should be fixed; and when it is, then you can just make everything numbered to start with, without thinking of names. However, so long as you cannot think of a name, then numbering it gives you no additional benefit (and leaving it unnumbered works around the bug, while we have it).

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    The so-called bug is a “feature”. To fix it would involve quite a change in how theorems are numbered. The benefit that would be lost is the ability to create new numbered environments without changing the core code. When this was first raised (incidentally, this’ll be a test of the redirections for the new location - if that link works, they’re fine) I mentioned it to Jacques and he explained that the current method had this flexibility. He didn’t rule out changing it, but I think it would need raising again to get him to look at it.

    So to have things numbered, we need anchors. But if an anchor isn’t going to be used, its name doesn’t have to be particularly meaningful. They do have to be unique (otherwise the numbering system seems to get messed up - just experimented on the Sandbox), but dummythma and so forth should be usable without stretching thoughts too far.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012
    Thanks Andrew, that rings a bell now. However, I maintain that the fact that a bug cannot be fixed without breaking a different feature does not thereby make the bug into a feature. (-:

    Might it be possible to have dummy anchors added automatically somehow, the same way that dummy anchors are created for all headers when there is a TOC?
    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2012

    Might it be possible to have dummy anchors added automatically somehow, the same way that dummy anchors are created for all headers when there is a TOC?

    That would be a reasonable compromise. I’ve suggested it to Jacques. We’ll see what he says.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2012

    Interesting to see the discussions on that forum. I had no idea that this existed.

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2012

    I may have this wrong - so don’t quote me - but Jacques originally set that up as an experiment in having a forum (and for fairly obvious reasons he wanted to have on one the same language as instiki). He mentioned it to me, and I started using it as a way to talk to him about instiki/nlab, and it’s sort of morphed into a general instiki-and-Jacques’-other-projects forum, but I don’t know if it’s ever been announced as such.

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeMar 16th 2012

    Jacques response:

    Ah.

    That is indeed a bug. Thanks.

    So looks hopeful.

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012

    This has now been fixed. See the Sandbox for a working example.

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012

    Great! Thanks!

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012

    Incidentally, this shouldn’t break any existing theorem numbers. Please say if someone spots some that are now out of sync with their references.

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012

    Awesome! I’ve deleted the now-unnecessary FAQ “My reference cites the wrong theorem”.

    (And I learned something, too; I didn’t know you could link with href=”#anchor” to the id=”…” of a <div> as opposed to the name=”…” of an <a>.)

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012

    @Mike: You can also link to the id attribute of an a element too. In fact, you can link to the id attribute of any element, and this is now preferred. (The name attribute of a elements are still supported for backwards compatibility, but it’s deprecated.)

    • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 23rd 2012

    Shows how long it’s been since I’ve written HTML. (-:

    • CommentRowNumber22.
    • CommentAuthorjcmckeown
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2012

    Silly question: is the only way to link to an #anchor in a different nlab page to write a [text](URL) link?

    Cheers,
    –Jesse

    • CommentRowNumber23.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2012

    Numbered equations can be done with \eqref, but that's the only way that I know of for numbered theorems.

    • CommentRowNumber24.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2012
    • (edited Nov 17th 2012)

    re #22:

    yes, I think so. But at least a relative URL is possible and should be preferred. So

      [linkname](pagename#anchor)
    
    • CommentRowNumber25.
    • CommentAuthorjcmckeown
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2012

    Oh, that does seem to work… the odd thing is, leaving out the pagename means implicitly the #anchor on this page, which is a little bit surprising… oh, that probably is the html default behaviour as well. Very good.

    Thanks!