So revert to revision 19 to undo Amélia’s changes?

]]>Actually I had hyperlinked “comodale” to *coalgebra over a comonad* also in this entry here, my latest version is revision 19

It’s not a typo.

Of course, I got that. I’m pointing out that the message hasn’t got across, and someone has taken it upon themselves to change what you’d written.

I’m also pointing out that the nLab isn’t helping someone to get this new terminology as nowhere does it explain it.

And now to confuse further, there’s an ’e’ left out at the crucial place:

$\array{ \text{monoid} & \text{module} \\ \text{monad} & \text{modal} \\ \text{theory} & \text{model} }$ ]]>It’s not a typo.

The monad modules are its modal types.

$\array{ \text{monoid} & \text{module} \\ \text{monad} & \text{modal} \\ \text{theory} & \text{model} }$ ]]>In the latest revision to #20, Amélia Liao has replaced ’comodale’ by ’comodule’ several times, assuming it to be a typo I imagine.

At the moment ’modale’ is a redirect for modal type.

lens (in computer science) has the terms ’modales’ and ’comodales’, but has them point to module over a monad and comodule over a comonad.

]]>have spelled out the proof (here)

that $V$-store comodales are equivalently lawful lenses with view $V$.

]]>I have re-written the (previously telegraphic) Definition-section from scratch (here) adding more details, more formatting and more commentary.

]]>