From: Urs Schreiber <urs.schreiber@googlemail.com>
To: "Joyal, André" <joyal.andre@uqam.ca>
Cc: categories@mta.ca
Subject: Re: Straw man terminology
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 19:59:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1OHdDy-0006Ey-J4@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)
Dear Andre,
> I agree that the terminology (infinity,1)-terminology can be useful.
Okay.
> Can I point out that Lurie is calling a quasi-category an infinity-category?
Okay, let's look at Lurie's use of terminology then. Notice that just
a little later in
On the classification of TFTs
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0905/0905.0465v1.pdf#page=31
In the remark 2.1.26 he speaks of
"the various models of the theory of (oo,1)-categories"
referring to Julie Bergner's article which shows that
quasi-categories, sSet-categories, Segal categories and complete Segal
spaces give four equivalent such models.
Then still a bit later in
(oo,2)-Categories and the Goodwillie calculus
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~lurie/papers/GoodwillieI.pdf
he uses terminology exactly as I have been suggesting in my previous messages:
starting in the third sentence:
"Let us use the term (oo,n)-category to indicate a higher category in
which all k-morphisms are assumed to be invertible for k> n.
[...]
The theory of (oo,1)-categories is also quite well understood, though
in this case there is a variety of possible approaches. [...] These
are known as quasicategories in the literature; we will follow the
terminology of [HTT] and refer to them simply as oo-categories."
So, for what it's worth, Lurie adopts the convention that I was
talking about, it seems to me: to say (oo,n)-category for the general
concept and use other terms for concrete models. He just happens to
have the extra convention that "oo-category" (without the ",1") is his
term for the model that you called quasi-category.
Maybe in this context it is noteworthy that in this last article
alone, there is presented literally a dozen of different and
equivalent models for (oo,2)-categories.
Best,
Urs
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
next reply other threads:[~2010-05-26 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-26 17:59 Urs Schreiber [this message]
2010-05-27 15:55 ` zoran skoda
2010-05-27 22:28 ` jim stasheff
2010-05-27 22:30 ` jim stasheff
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-27 8:44 Urs Schreiber
[not found] <AANLkTimkcg8A7yvuwGUgijWkkzXRFqkYU6o3kY5GXdP1@mail.gmail.com>
2010-05-27 3:31 ` Joyal, André
2010-05-22 16:42 Peter May
2010-05-24 13:07 ` Urs Schreiber
2010-05-26 13:48 ` Joyal, André
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1OHdDy-0006Ey-J4@mailserv.mta.ca \
--to=urs.schreiber@googlemail.com \
--cc=categories@mta.ca \
--cc=joyal.andre@uqam.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).