#16340: Infrastructure for modelling full subcategories
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  nthiery            |        Owner:
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_review
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.4
      Component:  categories         |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  full               |    Merged in:
  subcategories, homset              |    Reviewers:  Darij Grinberg,
        Authors:  Nicolas M. ThiƩry  |  Travis Scrimshaw
Report Upstream:  N/A                |  Work issues:
         Branch:                     |       Commit:
  public/categories/full_subcategories-16340|  
d4c7a88563a397291b6cd5ddadb8f574cc1eedb5
   Dependencies:                     |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by pbruin):

 Is it clear that the "structure category" terminology is the way to go?
 Personally I still don't like it very much (again, it pretends to be about
 categories but instead is about relations to their supercategories).  I
 would prefer the proposals made by Nicolas in comment:9 and Simon in
 comment:10 to have an `additional_structure()` method that returns
 something meaningful about the additional structure, not just True or
 False.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16340#comment:30>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to