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

Discussion Tag Cloud

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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2013
    • (edited Jan 5th 2013)

    created little entries

    to go along with the previous entries

    (whose nnForum-discussion is here)

    All of this is part of the cohesion - table.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2013

    So whenever we come across a Π\mathbf{\Pi}, we should replace it by ʃ, right? E.g., many in this section.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2013

    Maybe for the time being we can just state that ʃ is to be read synonymously with Π\mathbf{\Pi}, with the former potentially preferred in type theory, while the latter potentially preferred from the point of view of algebraic topology.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2013

    Did we settle on ʃ? I thought there was some argument that the potential for confusion with an integral sign was undesirable. I kind of like $$.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2013

    You have to decide. To me the similarity of \prod with Π\mathbf{\Pi} seems to be of the same sort of that of \int with ʃ. I am happy to live with both.

    The symbol “$” seems to raise the wrong associations in me, but I guess I can get used to it.

    What is not practical for me (if that was suggested above, maybe) is to go and change all the numerous occurences of Π\mathbf{\Pi} in all nnLab entries, all my published articles and all my preprints. Nor does it seem desireable to me.

    I am happy with telling the reader at the beginning of each context which notation it should be.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2013

    FWIW, I don’t like $ that much, and like the integral-looking thing more (although I don’t know how to type it). I’d always feel $ was some LaTeX typo.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2013

    (although I don’t know how to type it)

    see here

    I’d always feel $ was some LaTeX typo.

    Yes, that’s my first association, too. But I suppose I could get used to it.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 8th 2013

    I think it’s a shame if the use of $ in LaTeX means that we can’t ever also use it in mathematics. LaTeX uses % for comments, but we still feel free to use it for percentages. (-: And it seems unlikely to me that a LaTeX typo would ever actually produce a file which compiled and yet contained some $ characters in the output. But I guess two data points suggests that more other mathematicians would also feel uncomfortable with it.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 8th 2013
    • (edited Jan 8th 2013)

    But is there really an issue with “ʃ” ? To the extent that people think of ʃX X as being “integral over XX” where XX is a type, it actually makes sense: it can be thought of as the homotopy coend over XX thought of as a simplicial object. So the only sensible interpretatin of ʃX X as an “integral over XX” is actually the intended interpretation! So that’s good, not a problem.

    I’d think.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 8th 2013

    If you don’t think there’s a problem with ʃ, I’m okay with it. I guess in other contexts you would be integrating a function rather than a type. Okay, let’s go with ʃ.

    Would you object if someone else happened to change Π\mathbf{\Pi}s to ʃs in an nLab page? I’m not planning to go through the whole nLab either, but if I happen to be editing some page anyway, I might want to make it consistent.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 8th 2013

    Okay, good, yes!

    And I am fine with changing Π\mathbf{\Pi}s to ʃ, yes. I just feel overwhelmed with doing it globally and consistently.

    (One fine day we might have nnLab-wide macros…)

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 9th 2013

    (That would be pretty cool.)