Trying to see if C_∞-algebra is a better title…

]]>Added a disambiguation line at the top.

]]>Added a disambiguation line at the top.

]]>Then do the same please in cafe. Thanks, I am relieved, I was thinking that Bruno used that notation, and I am so much fond of his precision and clarity. Thank you again for transmitting Bruno’s lecture in $n$Lab for the rest of us.

]]>Sure, thanks. I was in a haste. Is fixed now.

]]>Why $C^\infty$ (referring tothe idea section) and not the logical $C_\infty$ in parallel with $A_\infty$-algebras. Merkulov I think has lower subscript consistently in both cases. Then there is no problem with $C^\infty$-rings in the sense of smooth. I remind you that there is also notation $G_\infty$ (lower subscript!!) for Gerstenhaber-infinity algebras.

]]>I noticed that we are lacking C-infinity algebra, so I very briefly created a very stubby stub (no time right now…)

]]>