Definition talk:Enumeration

Is the [...] part of the notation? --prime mover (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Technically not. It signifies the continuation of the exposition. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 17:49, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Does it serve a purpose? In other news, isn't one just as likely to want an enumeration that starts at $0$ rather than $1$? Is there a graceful way to deal with that possibility? --Dfeuer (talk) 18:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * One could argue it doesn't. I don't feel strongly about it. Regarding starting at zero, I doubt there is a graceful way; I also doubt that there is a need. We could do it tacitly by linking the definition of $\N_n$ instead of giving it, and then introducing it as "either $\{0\ldots n-1\}$ or $\{1\ldots n\}$" on its definition page. That'd be the neatest and probably also the least cluttered definition (we only want readers to go through that ambiguity once, not every time $\N_n$ crops up). &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

All issues have been resolved. Comments welcomed as to how this has been achieved. --prime mover (talk) 06:50, 30 September 2020 (UTC)