Talk:Residue Field of P-adic Norm on Rationals/Lemma 1

I agree that the notation $\Z_{\paren p}$ is cumbersome. It is the notation that is used in 2 of the 4 bibles I have on the $p$-adic numbers. The two that don’t use this notation don’t discuss the ring at all, so they have no need for a notation. The ring doesn’t have a specific name, so researching alternative notation is limited. So far I have seen nothing else.

When talking about valuations generally, the valuation ring associated with a valuation is often notated as $\mathcal O$. So I could change the notation to $\mathcal O_p$. —Leigh.Samphier (talk) 17:38, 3 July 2019 (EDT)

No, you're all right. I personally prefer $\Z_{\paren p}$ -- it's more intuitively clear what it means than is $\mathcal O_p$ which makes one think of big-O notation. If all the literature you can find uses $\Z_{\paren p}$ then it makes sense to go with that. Cheers. --prime mover (talk) 17:50, 3 July 2019 (EDT)