poset used without being defined

[PeterWhittaker]

On the orders page, poset is used without being defined, starting in the Greatest and Least section.

Normally, I would just create a pull request to either define it at first use, or to replace all instances of poset with partial orders or partially ordered sets but it seems to me that the correct solution is one that respects the style and approach you are using throughout. E.g., using partially ordered sets instead of partial orders might require some explanation about being a little loose with the poset concept, since the text is concerned more with partial orders than posets, strictly speaking.

Great read, by the way, thank you very much for pulling this together.

[abuseofnotation]

Hi,

Thanks for the poignant remark. Did a little research and it seems that there is no difference between "partial order" and "partially ordered sets", as all algebraic structures are defined using sets anyways, so I decided to replace all instances of "poset" with "partial order" - one less term.