Re: Name for a concept

[Eduardo Dubuc <edubuc@dm.uba.ar>]

Jean Benabou wrote:

>
> (2)- In most cases the canonical map being epic is not what one really
> wants. Of course Joyal assumes the category where the maps live to be a
> pre-topos, then it's enough, otherwise one cannot "compose" such
> squares.  Do we have to rename the squares where the canonical map is a
> universal epi, or those where its a universal regular epi?
>


very good point

i suggest, since we can live with epics, strict(=regular) epis,
universal such, etc etc,

we should have:

quasi-pullback

strict(=regular) quasi pullback

universal quasi-pullback

of course, the useful concept being: "strict universal quasi-pullback"

e.d.