search

HoTT / book

A textbook on informal homotopy type theory
2.01k stars 358 forks source link

"project" --> "book" in preface? #140

Closed dlicata335 closed 11 years ago

dlicata335 commented 11 years ago

In the phrase "While each of the above individuals contributed something to this project", the word "project" seems ambiguous to me: Does it refer to "homotopy type theory/univalent foundations" or "this book"? I think that is supposed to be the list of people who contributed more to the book specifically, but if so I think we should reword.

awodey commented 11 years ago

It should be the entire UF program - not just the book.

So it could say "program" rather than "project", also to match the title page.

The list of individuals who did a lot for the book in particular is further down.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:12 PM, Dan Licata notifications@github.com wrote:

In the phrase "While each of the above individuals contributed something to this project", the word "project" seems ambiguous to me: Does it refer to "homotopy type theory/univalent foundations" or "this book"? I think that is supposed to be the list of people who contributed more to the book specifically, but if so I think we should reword.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

dlicata335 commented 11 years ago

OK, that makes sense, but then I think that "a few of them contributed much more, and deserve to be recognized" is misleading: it makes it sound like these people contributed much more to the project/program, when I think we mean they contributed more to the book specifically.

mikeshulman commented 11 years ago

Yeah, Dan is right. On Apr 17, 2013 3:25 PM, "Dan Licata" notifications@github.com wrote:

OK, that makes sense, but then I think that "a few of them contributed much more, and deserve to be recognized" is misleading: it makes it sound like these people contributed much more to the project/program, when I think we mean they contributed more to the book specifically.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/HoTT/book/issues/140#issuecomment-16528420 .

RobertHarper commented 11 years ago

i agree. i think that the preface to the book is necessarily about the book itself, not about the project that gave rise to it. if we wish to write about the project as a social process, that can/should be done elsewhere. for this reason i think that the preface should simply list the participants, and not separate them into "members" and "visitors", which is an administrative distinction to do with the ias itself and how it runs these programs. if we then want to single out people for special recognition on the preparation of the book, i think that' s great, but it should be about the book.

bob

On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Mike Shulman wrote:

Yeah, Dan is right. On Apr 17, 2013 3:25 PM, "Dan Licata" notifications@github.com wrote:

OK, that makes sense, but then I think that "a few of them contributed much more, and deserve to be recognized" is misleading: it makes it sound like these people contributed much more to the project/program, when I think we mean they contributed more to the book specifically.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/HoTT/book/issues/140#issuecomment-16528420 .

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

awodey commented 11 years ago

I take the point. I'll fix it. S

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Mike Shulman notifications@github.com wrote:

Yeah, Dan is right. On Apr 17, 2013 3:25 PM, "Dan Licata" notifications@github.com wrote:

OK, that makes sense, but then I think that "a few of them contributed much more, and deserve to be recognized" is misleading: it makes it sound like these people contributed much more to the project/program, when I think we mean they contributed more to the book specifically.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/HoTT/book/issues/140#issuecomment-16528420 .

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

andrejbauer commented 11 years ago

Also, how ambiguous do we want to be about who the authors of the book are? This is in fact an ambiguous point. I thought we agreed at some point we would ask everyone to classify themselves as "author" or "not-so-much-author". Whatever happened to that idea? Would it work at all?

mikeshulman commented 11 years ago

I think if we are going to list all the participants in the program, rather than just the authors of the book, then it makes sense to separate people who were here for a long time from people who were only here for a week or two. That's maybe a blurry line, but it's a real thing, not just a bureaucratic technicality. On Apr 17, 2013 3:49 PM, "Robert Harper" notifications@github.com wrote:

i agree. i think that the preface to the book is necessarily about the book itself, not about the project that gave rise to it. if we wish to write about the project as a social process, that can/should be done elsewhere. for this reason i think that the preface should simply list the participants, and not separate them into "members" and "visitors", which is an administrative distinction to do with the ias itself and how it runs these programs. if we then want to single out people for special recognition on the preparation of the book, i think that' s great, but it should be about the book.

bob

On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Mike Shulman wrote:

Yeah, Dan is right. On Apr 17, 2013 3:25 PM, "Dan Licata" notifications@github.com wrote:

OK, that makes sense, but then I think that "a few of them contributed much more, and deserve to be recognized" is misleading: it makes it sound like these people contributed much more to the project/program, when I think we mean they contributed more to the book specifically.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub< https://github.com/HoTT/book/issues/140#issuecomment-16528420> .

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/HoTT/book/issues/140#issuecomment-16531566 .

DanGrayson commented 11 years ago

I'd like to demote myself from contributing "much more" to contributing "something or other" (to the book).

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Andrej Bauer notifications@github.comwrote:

Also, how ambiguous do we want to be about who the authors of the book are? This is in fact an ambiguous point. I thought we agreed at some point we would ask everyone to classify themselves as "author" or "not-so-much-author". Whatever happened to that idea? Would it work at all?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/HoTT/book/issues/140#issuecomment-16532423 .

andrejbauer commented 11 years ago

Github logs show otherwise, Dan.

cangiuli commented 11 years ago

I think Steve has definitively clarified this in 42e6cbc71f99e8ad07af59093e98afc564a12840