tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Hochschild tags)

Anton Geraschenko comments on "Hochschild tags" (6189)

2010-06-17T21:16:37-07:00

Nope: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/415/what-symbols-are-not-allowed-in-tags

Even if we could have a tag like [Hochschild-(co)homology], I think [Hochschild-cohomology] would keep getting recreated. At some point somebody suggested tag synonyms, which I think would be better.

Harry Gindi comments on "Hochschild tags" (6186)

2010-06-17T20:51:08-07:00

Can we add slashes in tags?

VP comments on "Hochschild tags" (6185)

2010-06-17T20:49:09-07:00

Even if it doesn't hurt too much, it's silly to have both. There are some not entirely elegant solutions, such as "Hochschild co/homology" and "Hochschild-co-homology".

Harry Gindi comments on "Hochschild tags" (6177)

2010-06-17T10:36:41-07:00

I don't see how it's really hurting anything at the moment to have them separate, that is, until we can add parentheses.

Pete L. Clark comments on "Hochschild tags" (6176)

2010-06-17T10:11:03-07:00

@Scott: Yes, I think "HH" is too terse. Although not ideal, I would prefer simply "Hochschild".

Scott Carnahan comments on "Hochschild tags" (6175)

2010-06-17T10:02:05-07:00

What do people think of [HH]? It reduces the distinction to superscript versus subscript indices. Is it too terse?

CSiegel comments on "Hochschild tags" (6170)

2010-06-17T05:54:44-07:00

My attempt to create it failed, looks like they are. Maybe someone should make a request on meta.SE?

Mariano comments on "Hochschild tags" (6168)

2010-06-17T04:55:17-07:00

oh, I imagined parenthesis were off limits, but that'd be perfect!

CSiegel comments on "Hochschild tags" (6167)

2010-06-17T04:53:56-07:00

How about just [hochschild-(co)homology]?

Harry Gindi comments on "Hochschild tags" (6166)

2010-06-17T04:49:28-07:00

Well, it's up to you guys who actually do Hochschild things =)

Mariano comments on "Hochschild tags" (6165)

2010-06-17T04:33:10-07:00

No one doing Hochschild things would imagine «Hochschild invariants» is supposed to mean «hochschild (co)homology», I'd say. I know I wouldn't :)

Harry Gindi comments on "Hochschild tags" (6164)

2010-06-17T03:58:03-07:00

I like [hochschild-invariants].

Kevin Lin comments on "Hochschild tags" (6163)

2010-06-17T02:18:59-07:00

Funny, I was just about to post a meta thread about the exact same thing (after seeing your question)...

Do people have any strong preference for [hochschild-homology] or for [hochschild-cohomology]? Or maybe there are some alternative possibilities? Maybe [hochschild-invariants]? I dunno.

Mariano comments on "Hochschild tags" (6162)

2010-06-17T01:27:19-07:00

Currently there are «Hochschild-homology» and «Hochschild-cohomology» tags... While of course the two refer to different things, it would be useful---at least to me---to merge them...