Talk:Glossary of order theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] A note on glossaries

There has been quite some discussion on the general use of glossary articles (see the discussion on topology glossary). Yet, I have created a new one. My reasons for doing so are to be explained.

I think a glossary can serve the following purposes:

  • Giving a general overview of the definitions already present in Wikipedia. This also avoids inconsistent usage of terms that are defined inline in huger articles.
  • Giving stub-definitions for concepts that are not presented via an own article (probably since there is nothing more to say about them).
  • Providing a platform to discuss general definitions.
  • Being a general road-map to estimate the current state of the order theory in Wikipedia: Are there many concepts without dedicated articles? Are concepts missing entirely? Are definitions non-standard or unclear?
  • Finally, it is a nice offline look-up. You can even print it or keep it in a separate browser tab/window/console while reading something else. This is not only relevant for people with a slow or expensive net-access, but also helps when Wikipedia's response times are approaching infinity.

My main point here is really to have a structuring aid for contributors to this field. Order theory is going to grow a lot in the future.

--Markus Krötzsch 15:14, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I've added a few entries. Please don't write "is called" in mathematical definitions. Michael Hardy 20:31, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Good:

A lattice is a poset in which all non-empty finite joins (suprema) and meets (infima) exist.

Bad:

A poset is called a lattice if ...

Michael Hardy 20:46, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

OK, I will consider this next time :-) (However, there are cases where "is called" is appropriate, namely when introducing another term for a given definition, like in "Ultrametrics are also called non-Archimedian metrics")

--Markus Krötzsch 11:15, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Michael's point is good. That way you avoid the iff discussion for definitions. The example Markus gives is OK, too, because the iff point isn't involved.

Charles Matthews 13:54, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/l/o/Talk%7EGlossary_of_order_theory_7bc7.html"