A reader pointed out that the "formulas" in this blog entry don't look correct. I don't know what it originally looked like, but I think he's correct -- in particular, the section "Abstracting All the Things" probably isn't right.
Doing a quick inspection, two issues jump out at me:
- There's a
side-note style on a couple of paragraphs, which currently isn't doing anything. We should figure out what it is supposed to look like, and improve that.
- Probably more importantly: there are some strings in there that are clearly supposed to be showing up as category theory math, that are just being rendered plain. Examples include
$*$, $* \rightarrow *$, $\circ$, $\oplus$, $s_1, s_2,$. It's pretty clear that those dollar signs are delimiting spans that should be rendering as code, with things like \oplus rendering as symbols. Was there some sort of post-processing step that we've lost, which was dealing with those?
This might get split into two separate bugs, to make resolution and tracking easier, once we've investigated a little and have a better idea of what's going on here.
A reader pointed out that the "formulas" in this blog entry don't look correct. I don't know what it originally looked like, but I think he's correct -- in particular, the section "Abstracting All the Things" probably isn't right.
Doing a quick inspection, two issues jump out at me:
side-notestyle on a couple of paragraphs, which currently isn't doing anything. We should figure out what it is supposed to look like, and improve that.$*$,$* \rightarrow *$,$\circ$,$\oplus$,$s_1, s_2,$. It's pretty clear that those dollar signs are delimiting spans that should be rendering as code, with things like\oplusrendering as symbols. Was there some sort of post-processing step that we've lost, which was dealing with those?This might get split into two separate bugs, to make resolution and tracking easier, once we've investigated a little and have a better idea of what's going on here.