Neither eta-conversion nor beta conversion used to point back to conversion rule. But both referred in their first like to an unspecified “process”, as in “eta-conversion is a process…”. I have changed that to “eta-conversion is a conversion rule…” and similarly at beta-conversion.
Maybe all these entries should be cross-linked with the new entry explicit conversion.
]]>extensional type theory -> set-level type theory
identity types are extensional -> identity types are valued in propositions
Anonymous
]]>Added a reference to Seely’s 2-categorical analysis of eta expansion.
]]>