Dear categorists, The question for me is not : small or large categories, but small or large structures. The Bourbaki's time was the time of small structures (groups, monoïds, rings, spaces, etc), the "categorical time" is the time of structures of structures,i.e. large structures (groupoids, complete categories, abelian catégories, topos, etc.). The bridge beetwen the firsts and the seconds is the Yoneda lemma, that is to say the introduction of logic, thus of the only true evil category : the category of sets. All the other large categorical stuctures introduced by categorists are deduced from category Set, by abstraction, generalisations, constructions or restrictions. In fact "category theory" is an (wonderfull but) inappropriate name (here the word category is only an important and historical keyword): the reason is that a lot of data (limits, classifiant object, etc) appear as properties because of their universal properties (unicity up to isomorphism). But "category theory" is an illusion, nobody studies seriouly the categorical structures (I don't know any structure theorem on the categorical structures without additional properties). That is my starting point of reflexion on this subject. I think there is a true theory of the small categories, but it is not yet born, if it must ever exist. This theory should be, not only for the 1-categories, but also for the n and omega-categories (strict or not possibly). And, for me, the Yoneda lemma is an important tool (but only a tool). Such a theory may be eventually important for the computer science (particularly for the formal languages). My best wishes for the new year, Albert burroni [For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]