Skip to main content
11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 16, 2013 at 11:53 comment added user9072 ...creation of more specialised tags 'below' the different top-level tags, if there is a need. However, the/a top-level tag should still be used in addition to more specialised tags. So, for the specifc case one could consider tagging it say history-of-calculus in addition to, yet not instead of, ho. So, a re-tagging definietly should not be done. One could however consider tagging with something in addition. (For bigger activities of this kind it would be however good to check before on meta,; and, not do too many tag-edits at the same time, not to clutter the frontpage)
Apr 16, 2013 at 11:42 comment added user9072 @Joël: As katz said the ho.history-overview tag corresponds to a math arXic category; more generally, the tags with a two letter prefix correspond precisely to the math arXiv categories. (There can be temporary deviations, when somebody creates something, but these are considered as "errors" and treated as such.) These arXiv-tags serve as top-level tags on MO; each question, if reasonably possible, should have at least one such tag. (Compare the explanatory text on the page where one asks a questions just below teh field to enter a tag.) Of course, this should not prevent the...
Apr 16, 2013 at 11:00 answer added Aaron Meyerowitz timeline score: 3
Apr 15, 2013 at 16:55 comment added Mikhail Katz The "History-overview" category is probably borrowed from the ArXiv.
Apr 15, 2013 at 16:53 history edited Mikhail Katz CC BY-SA 3.0
lengthier quote
Apr 15, 2013 at 16:48 comment added Joël Another comment, which is not especially addressed to the OP, but to the whole MO community, and perhaps should be on meta-MO (but wondering about this should be on meta-meta-MO): what's the meaning of this tag, "history-overview". Shouldn't we create a tag history-of-mathematics or even perhaps history-of-calculus-and-analysis and retag most of the history-overview tag?
Apr 15, 2013 at 16:45 comment added Joël Nice question. But what period is Robinson exactly talking about? How far does "around" in "aronud 1900" extends? Does it contain the works of Weierstrass ? or even earlier, of Cauchy ? Or is it restricted to one or two decades after and before 1900 ? In the latter case, it is of course much more difficult to see what lapses he is talking about, but this interpretation seems difficult to conciliate with the phrase "early proponent of the doctrine of limits". Perhaps providing a wider context for the passage of Robinson you quote would be helpful.
Apr 15, 2013 at 7:19 answer added Mikhail Katz timeline score: 1
Apr 4, 2013 at 12:06 answer added user112109 timeline score: 1
Apr 4, 2013 at 7:24 history edited Mikhail Katz
added history tag
Apr 3, 2013 at 16:43 history asked Mikhail Katz CC BY-SA 3.0