Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
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...
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.
I like [hochschild-invariants].
No one doing Hochschild things would imagine «Hochschild invariants» is supposed to mean «hochschild (co)homology», I'd say. I know I wouldn't :)
Well, it's up to you guys who actually do Hochschild things =)
oh, I imagined parenthesis were off limits, but that'd be perfect!
What do people think of [HH]? It reduces the distinction to superscript versus subscript indices. Is it too terse?
I don't see how it's really hurting anything at the moment to have them separate, that is, until we can add parentheses.
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".
Can we add slashes in tags?
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.
1 to 14 of 14