For readability, I have replaced the symbol “$\pitchfork$” (`\pitchfork`

) for “lifting property” by “$⧄$” (`⧄`

).

(Following discussion in another thread here.)

[ edit: this page is in need of some further improvement of its notation: that bar-notation is no good for the present purpose. We should use notation as in this example. ]

]]>Looking at *Joyal-Tierney calculus* in the section on *pushout tensoring* reminds me that the rendering of over-bars is often less than optimal. Generally the bars tend to come out too small. Using overline instead helps with that, but here is yet another problem: in inline maths (as opposed to displayed maths) both \bar and \overline over an \otimes are rendered *next* to the \otimes, as opposed to above it.

On that particular page we should just decide on a different decoration altogether. But generally the rendering behaviour here deserves to be fixed.

]]>For some $n$Lab work that I will do in the next days, I want to be able, for convenience, to refer the reader to an entry which exhibits the iterated lifting-property-calculus that is nicely discussed in the appendix of the article by Joyal-Tierney on complete Segal spaces:

For the moment I titled that entry *Joyal-Tierney calculus*. Not sure, though, if that is a good name. Suggestions would be welcome.