Recent comments
There are currently 2552 comments. You are now displaying comments 0 to 20 in reverse chronological order.
- On July 27 Anonymous left comment 2659 on tag 07EZ
Proof of d) Why is there a presentation of $A_a$ with $J/J^2$ being free? Proof of e) It should s...
- On July 27 Raymond Cheng left comment 2658 on tag 025T
Looks like the future reference for changing big sites is [Tag 03FO](http://stacks.math.columbia.edu...
- On July 23 Ko Aoki left comment 2657 on tag 02ND
You should assume that $\mathcal{I}$ is nonzero so that $X'$ doesn't become empty.
- On July 23 Ko Aoki left comment 2656 on tag 061S
I think "By Krull's intersection theorem" is more straightforward than "By the Artin-Rees lemma". Ac...
- On July 23 Ko Aoki left comment 2655 on tag 011D
Typo in the second sentence: "... be a *sort* exact sequence of complexes." should be replaced by "....
- On July 23 Ko Aoki left comment 2654 on tag 06B7
Typo in the first exact sequence: "$i^*\Omega_{X/S}$" should be replaced by "$h^*\Omega_{X/S}$".
- On July 20 BB left comment 2653 on tag 086M
The limit in the statement of the lemma should probably be a colimit.
- On July 19 Johan left comment 2652 on tag 01Y1
In comment #2651 I forgot to say: $j : U \to X$ is the open immersion and $j_!$ is extension by zero...
- On July 19 Johan left comment 2651 on tag 01Y1
Nope because you can have things like $j_!(\mathcal{F}|_U)$ where $U \subset X$ is an open. Such mod...
- On July 19 Student left comment 2650 on tag 01Y1
Isn't the quasi-coherence assumption superfluous? That is, any submodule of $\mathcal{F}$ is coheren...
- On July 19 David Hansen left comment 2649 on tag 0BIA
In condition (2) of the Lemma, you need to allow for the possibility that some D_J's are empty.
- On July 16 Daniel Dore left comment 2648 on tag 0DTH
Shouldn't the application of Lemma 90.11.10 be to show the morphism $\mathrm{Spec}(k) \rightarrow \m...
- On July 16 Daniel Dore left comment 2647 on tag 0DTH
Shouldn't the application of Lemma 90.11.12 be to show the morphism $\mathrm{Spec}(k) \rightarrow \m...
- On July 14 Axel left comment 2646 on tag 0BBJ
3rd Paragraph of the proof: The reference to Tag 07ZA (Lemma 15.8.4) should point to Tag 07ZC (Lemma...
- On July 12 Manuel Hoff left comment 2645 on tag 01J5
In 25.13.1, the last sentence mentions a map of local rings, but this map should go in the other dir...
- On July 12 Xiaowen left comment 2644 on tag 0CXI
$Y$ in the proof should be $F_\theta$.
- On July 11 Sebastian Ørsted left comment 2643 on tag 017O
It would probably be worth remarking that you just reproved Dold–Kan.
- On July 10 Johan left comment 2642 on tag 09WQ
Thanks again for pointing this out. Luckily we didn't use this lemma anywhere but in this section an...
- On July 10 Johan left comment 2641 on tag 09WQ
OK, yes, this is just terrible! I will say more: it is a disgrace! Thanks very much for pointing thi...
- On July 10 Steffen Sagave left comment 2640 on tag 09WQ
The statement of this lemma appears to be wrong. Here is a counterexample: Let $G$ be a non-trivi...