Open barrettj12 opened 2 years ago
My opinion is that abbreviation in library could cause confusion and naming conflict. So I prefer Mรถrtbergโs suggestion that we should not use too much abbreviation and anyone needing short names can rename them in their own files.
Maybe we can use other fonts to emphasize being a category like we do in math texts. Does ๐ข๐โด๐๐
look better or not๏ผ
My opinion is that abbreviation in library could cause confusion and naming conflict.
Sure, that's a valid concern. Although, we already use a lot of abbreviations and I don't think this causes ambiguity or conflict - see AbGroup
, CommRing
, NatTrans
, isIso
. Also I can't imagine Cat
being used as an abbreviation for anything but Category
.
Maybe we can use other fonts to emphasize being a category like we do in math texts. Does
๐ข๐โด๐๐
look better or not๏ผ
Nice idea, but unfortunately I think that cursive font is barely readable. Unicode does provide some mathematical bold fonts e.g. ๐๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ฝ
, but I'm not sure if digging so deep into Unicode is a good idea.
I agree, let's not go down the rabbit hole of Unicode fonts... I already have trouble reading some symbols in the library in my browser (yes, I can probably sort that out, but I don't have time or energy to deal with font issues...)
The
Algebra
andCategories
libraries are expanding, with many different authors adding new structures and instances thereof. This presents a problem of inconsistent naming between different structures and instances.@mortberg says in #636:
I think this problem is probably more severe in the
Categories
library.Categories.Instances
). We haveCommRingsCategory
as well asSET
andFUNCTOR
.NaturalTransformation
module exportsNatTrans
andNatIso
.But, for example, there doesn't seem to be a convention for instances of algebraic structures either.
Personally, I'm in favour of using the short, conventional, boldface names of categories where they exist (
Set
,Grp
,Ring
,Cat
,Ab
, etc). I think theCommRingsCategory
convention is unnecessarily verbose - I'd rather see it calledCRing
as it usually is in writing. Though maybe for categories of algebraic structures, there should be a connection to the name of the structure inAlgebra
.Also, is
Cat
an acceptable abbreviation ofCategory
? E.g.AbelianCat
,MonoidalCat
,EnrichedCat
. How much abbreviation do we allow - if I define strict monoidal categories, should this be calledStrictMonoidalCategory
,StrictMonoidalCat
,StrictMonCat
,StrMonCat
, ...?