The Stacks project

Proof. Using that a base change of a closed immersion (resp. open immersion, resp. immersion) is another one it is clear that (1) implies (2) and (2) implies (3). Also (3) implies (4) since we can take $V$ to be a disjoint union of affines, see Properties of Spaces, Lemma 66.6.1.

Assume $V \to Y$ is as in (4). Let $\mathcal{P}$ be the property closed immersion (resp. open immersion, resp. immersion) of morphisms of schemes. Note that property $\mathcal{P}$ is preserved under any base change and fppf local on the base (see Section 67.3). Moreover, morphisms of type $\mathcal{P}$ are separated and locally quasi-finite (in each of the three cases, see Schemes, Lemma 26.23.8, and Morphisms, Lemma 29.20.16). Hence by More on Morphisms, Lemma 37.57.1 the morphisms of type $\mathcal{P}$ satisfy descent for fppf covering. Thus Spaces, Lemma 65.11.5 applies and we see that $X \to Y$ is representable and has property $\mathcal{P}$, in other words (1) holds.

The equivalence of (1) and (5) follows from the fact that $\mathcal{P}$ is Zariski local on the target (since we saw above that $\mathcal{P}$ is in fact fppf local on the target). $\square$