Definition talk:Chart

Please don't just delete stuff because it's "not presently used and can be re-added". That's against our philosophy. It needs to be put back, under whatever name it needs to be. --prime mover (talk) 23:17, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Coordinate function added into coordinate; I think not worthy of it's own page. Coordinate map is easy to do; but depends on house style: if redirecting a page to chart and adding the definition there fits house style then I suggest doing that, if not I'll make a page.

Dimension

Incidentally, I noticed a form of ambiguity on what is the Euclidean space here, $\R^n$ or $\C^n$; this may be aptly dealt with by separating "complex dimension" and "real dimension" for loc.Eucl. spaces. --Lord_Farin (talk) 23:23, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Even if we do distinguish, it is (a priori) ambiguous to talk about its dimension as if it were intrinsic. The machinery of algebraic topology is needed to prove that the dimension is well-defined. --barto (talk) 13:02, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

There's an easy way to resolve this issue, by assigning a dimension to the chart instead of the space. --barto (talk) 13:02, 2 August 2017 (EDT)

Subset?

To be super-technical, "homeomorphism" applies to mappings between spaces, not between subsets, per se. It might be better to leave it alone, for the sake of clarity, or it might be better to call $U$ a subspace and the mapping an "open topological embedding". I don't know what to recommend. --Dfeuer (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

PW isn't really currently ready to bear the manifold stuff, and the naming of such things shouldn't concern us at the moment. It was plainly me catering for a few easy-to-fix maintenance flags. More advanced stuff is years of work away from where we are now. — Lord_Farin (talk) 20:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)