We are talking about this line, supposedly).
But is the codomain, in usual simplicial conventions (remove the 0-vertex!)
In any case, for the moment I have removed the symbol “” (it’s not too illuminating and never appears again, anyway). Somebody should indicate the actual definition of that morphism!
]]>I think that the statement about the gluing fibration should be not right? We are restricting the codomain fibration along the inverse image of the geometric morphism, not the domain functor. Right?
]]>Thanks!
]]>I filled in the holes in the definition by copying the missing parts from the elephant, and rephrasing a bit.
The equivalent reformulations use terminology that needs to be defined, therefore I amended separating family, adding the definition of separating family in a fibration.
The concept of gluing fibration still needs to be defined – probably by remarking on the page on Artin gluing that the appropriate projection is a fibration. I’ll come back to that maybe tomorrow.
]]>Jonas Frey has kindly added some material to the Properties-section at bounded geometric morphism. I have touched the formatting a little and added some more cross-links with the entry internal sheaf.
Notice that the entry is still waiting for somebody to complete two items in its Definition section!
]]>Oh I see. It was fine as it was. I’ll roll back, but fix a typo.
]]>Why don’t you just say quotient of a subobject of …, instead of subquotient of a subobject of …?
]]>I corrected the characterisation of boundedness.
]]>started stub for bounded geometric morphism
]]>