<peasthope <at> shaw.ca> writes:
When S is a set, the notation "a \epsilon S" is familiar. Is this ever extended to CT? All the texts I recall use natural language such as "A is an object of C". What if a more symbolic notation is required?
Thanks, ... Peter E.
Dear Peter, There are two types of entities, one called objects and the other called arrows. However, there are ways to deal away with objects, and one could only consider the arrows, in which case although in my opinion the presentation becomes much more formal and less intuitive (?!), one could easily import the symbols of $\epsilon$; alternatively, one could formulate two classes (one for objects and other for arrows) and do a similar import; or else one could use a type theoretic fashion, say "A.Obj" to denote an instance of objects and "A.Arr" to denote an instance of arrows, and so on. Yet, in some form or the other one could do this...., but I ponder: why? Thus, I could not quite understand the intent of your question. Please could you elaborate on this. With my regards, partha [For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]