History of tag 09II
Go back to the tag's page.
| type |
time |
link |
|
changed the statement and the proof
|
2022-01-23 |
9cee969 |
Try to use L/K notation for field extensions
We could also try to consistenly use "field extension" and not just
"extension" and consistently use "ring extension", etc.
|
|
changed the proof
|
2021-07-15 |
f7b2d6a |
Edits concerning solutions and weak solutions
|
|
changed the proof
|
2018-09-18 |
3873f5d |
Be more precise using formally smooth
|
|
changed the proof
|
2017-10-05 |
0adaa52 |
Remove 'f.f.'
Sad IMHO.
Thanks to BCnrd, Dario Weissmann, and sdf
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/02JQ#comment-2762
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/02JQ#comment-2765
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/02JQ#comment-2766
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/02JQ#comment-2767
|
|
changed the proof
|
2015-09-03 |
77ac69a |
Neurotic changes
Given a finite extension L/K of the fraction field of a discrete
valuation ring, we say L/K is 'unramified wrt A' instead of just saying
that it is 'unramified'. There are two reasons:
1. There may be more than one dvr whose fraction field is K
2. We already have a notion of an unramified ring map and we do not
want the reader to think we are asking K ---> L to be unramified as a
ring map...
Yes, this is probably not necessary...
|
|
changed the statement
|
2015-09-02 |
e284f72 |
Add a reference
|
|
assigned tag 09II
|
2013-08-19 |
3e8a5b8
|
Tags: Added new tags
|
|
created statement with label proposition-epp-essentially-finite-type in more-algebra.tex
|
2013-08-15 |
9684279 |
Reduced fibre theorem
First version. Of course, there are many variants, etc.
|