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.
Added a pointer to adjoint functors and triangle identities to the entry whiskering. Feel that an encyclopedia entry on that operation should mention these two other entries.
I don’t know if I agree with that sentence (“the most important”), although I won’t say it’s obviously wrong.
One thing should be clarified, however: the nLab isn’t quite an encyclopedia, and it would be somewhat misleading to think of it this way. Some of it may look that way, and some of us may have encyclopedist tendencies on occasion, but the true situation is a little more complicated. If you haven’t already, you might have a look at About.
Let’s just write “An important use of whiskering” instead. That carries all the intended information.
Thanks. Neither the use of the word “encyclopedia” nor the phrase “the most important” were chosen with care by me, sorry. But thanks for taking them seriously, words are to be taken seriously.
Added a reference and some “Related concepts”-information to whiskering. Whiskering are typical and “natural” examples of pasting diagrams which along A. J. Power’s method of proof give boundary walks which are non-trails.
Peter, you added under “Related entries” the words
- Usual whiskering diagrams have 1-cells which constitute a plane digraph. The boundary walk of the exterior face has arc-repetitions. (Two repetitions of multiplicity two, for that matter. These terms are explained in plane digraphs.
We may have mentioned a few times before that we like to stick to the convention that the sections titled “Related entries” contain mostly just a plain link list, while any actual information should go into the main body of the text. The idea is that “Related entries” gives the reader a quick overview of just that: related entries.
So in principle your text should go under “Properties”. But it seems such a trivial and unimportant property that I wouldn’t quite think it needs to be said.
Urs, thanks for this comment.
while any actual information should go into the main body of the text.
Your mentionings of this editorial principle I had read, but somehow not internalized yet. Had simply thought it to be an improvement.
So in principle your text should go under “Properties”. But it seems such a trivial and unimportant property that I wouldn’t quite think it needs to be said.
The passage has been removed. Will remember that the “Related Concept” section is not to contain anything else than lists of related terms.
I agree that that the passage should not go into whiskering. I am less sure whether to agree that this is a
trivial and unimportant property
but it should go into the systematic and detailed treatment of A. J. Power’s pasting theorem, where it belongs, and which hopefully will be ready soon.
Thanks again.
Peter, what is your current email address?
added pointer to:
1 to 10 of 10