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.
Prompted by discussion in the thread on “internal sets” (badly named so) I have added to h-set a comment in Properties - Relation to internal set.
I have also edited and expanded the Idea section a little. Please check if you can live with this.
I also disagree with this, for the same reason I mentioned in the other thread. Usually, in homotopy type theory (especially when regarded as the internal language of an $(\mathcal{X}_i, \mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X_(\infty,1)$-topos) it is the 0-truncated objects which play the role of “sets”.
What shall we do?
I suppose we need to more thoroughly keep qualifiers around. Are we on the safe side with the “n-strictness”-terminology?
Right now I can’t check or do anything, as I have a connection of about one bit per second. But I’ll try to fix later whatever mess I may have created.
I’ve rewritten the section “Relation to internal sets” at h-set from the perspectitve I advocated in the other thread. I don’t have time right now to hash out the right “strict” qualifiers, unfortunately. Can you live with what I wrote for now?
Thanks! Very nice and very helpful.
1 to 7 of 7