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.
October 24, 2012 09:26:08 by Anonymous Coward (99.133.144.164) has added a comment questioning the validity of a sentence at reflective subcategory.
More comments on this.
Attempted to answer…
Thanks, Yaron.
But let’s not have discussion inside an entry. It’s hard to follow for those readers here who might want to follow and distracting for those readers of the entry who are looking for information.
Instead I have turned the original example into what is now (Counter)Example 4 and made your comment be what is now Remark 3 right below it.
I have slightly edited your comment. For instance where you said that this entry is about full subcategories only I replaced it with a pointer to what is currently Remark 1.
Let’s have any further discussion here in the discussion forum and only move stable material into the entry.
Hi Urs – sure, I will follow these guidelines in the future.
I would be more inclined to say ’the non-full inclusion of unital rings into non-unital rings has a left adjoint, but we do not call it a reflective subcategory because it is not full.’ Anyone object?
I like that wording.
Implemented.
1 to 8 of 8