Two additional arguments against the proposal to make the statements self-contained.
1. If I would make the statements self-contained then I would need to duplicate the (rather lengthly) passage with definition of funcoid in every of the 12 statements. This would be content duplication and content duplication is a bad thing. Better to refer to one source that is my online articles.
2. Definitions alone may be not enough to catch the semantics (sense) of a mathematical object. To understand what an abstract definition really means is needed to know properties of the object not the definition alone. So to perfectly match rs's requirement for the statements to be self-contained I would need to reproduce full texts of the articles (well, without proofs) in problem discussions. This is clearly a nonsense.
login/create account
Drupal
CSI of Charles University
Re: Re: Please improve presentation!
Two additional arguments against the proposal to make the statements self-contained.
1. If I would make the statements self-contained then I would need to duplicate the (rather lengthly) passage with definition of funcoid in every of the 12 statements. This would be content duplication and content duplication is a bad thing. Better to refer to one source that is my online articles.
2. Definitions alone may be not enough to catch the semantics (sense) of a mathematical object. To understand what an abstract definition really means is needed to know properties of the object not the definition alone. So to perfectly match rs's requirement for the statements to be self-contained I would need to reproduce full texts of the articles (well, without proofs) in problem discussions. This is clearly a nonsense.