History of tag 03GV
Go back to the tag's page.
type |
time |
link |
changed the proof
|
2023-01-08 |
214ff84 |
Fix typo in more-morphisms
THanks to nkym
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/03GV#comment-7687
|
changed the proof
|
2017-02-16 |
11fbadf |
Fix typo in 03GV
Thanks to Minseon Shin
|
changed the statement and the proof
|
2012-07-30 |
c40aa46 |
Normalization and smooth base change for spaces
|
changed the proof
|
2012-05-21 |
f258fb9 |
move a chapter and rename a chapter
We moved the chapter "Cohomology of Algebraic Spaces" earlier so
we can use the results earlier in the treatment of algebraic
spaces. Also, we finally renamed the chapter "Coherent
Cohomology" to "Cohomology of Schemes" which is better.
|
changed the statement
|
2012-05-15 |
5158ffd |
Stratify by degree fibre
This works well for flat, lfp, quasi-finite morphisms.
|
changed the proof
|
2011-08-10 |
65ce54f |
LaTeX: \Spec
Introduced the macro
\def\Spec{\mathop{\rm Spec}}
and changed all the occurences of \text{Spec} into \Spec.
|
changed the statement
|
2010-09-09 |
5fca34e |
Smooth => regular => normal
|
assigned tag 03GV
|
2009-10-18 |
a9d7807
|
Tags: Added new tags
|
created statement with label lemma-normalization-smooth-localization in more-morphisms.tex
|
2009-10-16 |
24e5661 |
More on Morphisms: Improved discussion on quasi-finite morphisms
Now we use the material on normalization (in Morphisms) which
was not available in the first pass on the structure of
quasi-finite separated morphisms. In particular, using the fact
that normalization commutes with etale base change improves the
exposition and clarifies the proof. Not only that, it also gives
a slightly more general result, namely, we do nnot even have to
assume the morphism is quasi-finite at all. Just finite type and
separated.
Future addition: It seems quite possible that given a proper f :
X --> S with S qc+qs then the normalization of S in X is just
the spectrum of f_*O_X and moreover the fibres of the map to
this normalization are connected. In other words, the connected
fibres thing holds without assuming the base is Noetherian. It
should be possible to prove this using the results on limits of
schemes.
modified: more-morphisms.tex
|