Talk:Glossary of topology

message: Thank you, thank you, thank you.  To all of you who have contributed to this page: you have done more for my understanding of topology than four different books and a whole lot of papers.  This page is a miracle -- nothing else like it exists, anywhere (and believe me, I've been looking for a long time!).
The crucial reasons why glossary style works is that it effectively requires each term have a definition which:
* is one line long
* uses only general knowledge and other terms on the same page ("closed under definition-lookup")
I actually favor some technical changes to the wikipedia codebase that would push all pages towards including something similar (so you could build automatic glossaries), but until something like that is implemented, I think this is great.
Megacz 07:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glossaries bad? 

message: I strongly disagree with the removal of the term basis from the dictionary, because:
* The page "basis (topology)" redirects to here.
* It's the only term I knew it by when I arrived; it took me a long time to find the entry for base and realise it was the same thing.
Could this be added back?
Derrick Coetzee 01:26, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of basis 

message: One problem with the glossary is that it's uncertain which entries already have real articles associated with them and which are still functioning as "mini-stubs" until the article is written. To distinguish these better, for any term which has an article associated with it, I link the bold word beginning that definition directly to its article. I haven't finished doing this though, and any help would be appreciated.
I also added more links while I was at it; considering this may be a page that someone consults when encountering a new term which may in turn require more new terms, I think it's deserving of a high number of (meaningful) links.
Deco 07:41, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glossary word links 

message: Do you think it is ok to add here terms from differential topology?
Tosha 19:32, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  + Differential topology ??

message: I realise, esp. with my recent additions, that the glossary is now officially bursting at the seam. I'm not sure how much of a problem this is...it's true, a "very long glossary" becomes difficult to use. But, this is an area with a ton of definitions. Part of the problem is that general topology is the backbone for so many OTHER areas, that even including the most fundamental "helper" definitions creates a long list (semilocally simply connected, homogeneous, etc.) One can argue not to include "helper" defs at all, but then again, one can argue that general topology itself developed as a result of "helper defs" to other fields, (not counting the recent explosion of study of point-set topology for its own sake, that is...) Maybe things like "TG" and "TVS" can be safely removed, since they aren't strictly topological objects (similarly, I don't think "fundamental group" belongs as an entry, since it's an algebraic object). What do people think. Revolver 14:41, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the glossary is helpful, and I do not have a problem with the length.  I agree that algebraic topology needs its own glossary, and that "fundamental group" does not belong in this one. Rick Norwood 13:41, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bursting? 

message: After my indulgences at mathematical jargon I've become fond of definition lists for pages like this.  For one, they just look better, and they take up less space in markup as well.  One feature I'd love to see, which I don't see, is being able to link to particular items in the list as one would link to sections of the page; this seems uniquely desirable for this particular list but it's not implemented as far as I know.  So: if anyone reads this who knows what's what in the universe of Wikipedia development, could you tell me if this can get implemented?  And in the mean time, is it worth putting HTML tags  tags in front of each definition, so that when we have a cross reference we link there rather than directly to the main page?  This sort of centralizes the control of each term. Ryan Reich 16:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition lists 

message: Are these terms from topology I learned at school no longer of any use? Hotlorp 15:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Node, vertex, edge 

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 13:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: Currently, the wikitext for the definitions on the glossary page uses empty lines in many places to separate consecutive entries. When rendered as HTML by the wiki engine this will cause the entries to be broken up into sequences of singleton lists. E.g.,
 ;Accessible: See T_1. 
 
 ;Accumulation point: See limit point.
 
 ;Alexandrov topology:  A space X has the Alexandrov topology (or is finitely generated) if arbitrary intersections of open sets in X are open, or equivalently, if arbitrary unions of closed sets are closed.
(with empty lines between the definitions) will be turned into
 
 Accessible
 See <a href="/wiki/T1_space" title="T1 space"><img class="tex" alt="T_1" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/5/7/a5749ec33f2c95fe8c19d702d76d4968.png" /></a>.
 
 
 Accumulation point
 See <a href="/wiki/Limit_point" title="Limit point">limit point</a>.
 
 
 <a href="/wiki/Alexandrov_topology" title="Alexandrov topology">Alexandrov topology</a>
 A space X has the <a href="/wiki/Alexandrov_topology" title="Alexandrov topology">Alexandrov topology</a> (or is finitely generated) if arbitrary intersections of open sets in X are open, or equivalently, if arbitrary unions of closed sets are closed.
 
by the wiki engine, where every definition is wrapped by its own definition list. Without the empty lines, i.e., like this
 ;Accessible: See T_1. 
 ;Accumulation point: See limit point.
 ;Alexandrov topology:  A space X has the Alexandrov topology (or is finitely generated) if arbitrary intersections of open sets in X are open, or equivalently, if arbitrary unions of closed sets are closed.
the definition list will be rendered as 
 
 Accessible
 See <a href="/wiki/T1_space" title="T1 space"><img class="tex" alt="T_1" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/5/7/a5749ec33f2c95fe8c19d702d76d4968.png" /></a>.
 Accumulation point
 See <a href="/wiki/Limit_point" title="Limit point">limit point</a>.
 <a href="/wiki/Alexandrov_topology" title="Alexandrov topology">Alexandrov topology</a>
 A space X has the <a href="/wiki/Alexandrov_topology" title="Alexandrov topology">Alexandrov topology</a> (or is finitely generated) if arbitrary intersections of open sets in X are open, or equivalently, if arbitrary unions of closed sets are closed.
 
with all definitions collected in a single list. Apparantly, people using screen readers can easily navigate between the definitions within a single definition list but not if the list is broken as it is now. See also Wikipedia:Accessibility. I would like to remove the empty lines between the entries if nobody objects. — Tobias Bergemann (talk) 10:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accessibility 

message: There seem to be several definitions in the literature, none of which are obviously the same as that in the article:
* The only strictly finer topology is the discrete topology
* Contains no infinite compact subset
* Exactly one isolated point
* Hausdorff with exactly one isolated point
* Every compact subset has an isolated point
* Punctured neighbourhoods of a point form an ultrrafilter
* The empty set is the only nowhere dense set
* Alexandrov and zero-dimensional
* The set of isolated points is dense
Is there a reliable reference that relates these? Junior Wrangler (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Almost discrete 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glossary of topology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061205203826/http://math.berkeley.edu:80/~apollo/topodefs.ps to http://math.berkeley.edu/~apollo/topodefs.ps
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We wanted to learn all these terms in a flashcard format so we built one and made it freely available. Thought it would be helpful for anyone who wanted to learn the content of this glossary in a flashcard format like Anki to also be able to discover that they exist and have access to it from the source.
Was going to suggest it to be added in the external links section like the following but as it is linking to our own site, following the instructions of the Wikipedia guidelines, thought it would be best to leave this in the talk page for other contributors to see if it would be relevant or see if there was a better place/format to put it
*Flashcard version of the Wikipedia Glossary of topology in an Anki-readable format
Darigov Research (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Flashcards link

message: The redirect Punctured plane has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  1234qwer1234qwer4 00:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Punctured plane]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]