Yesterday I asked a question about terminology and to my surprise it was closed and downvoted. I would like to understand why. Here is my reasoning:

Usually there are good reasons for the choices of terminology made by mathematicians (even though it is sometimes not obvious from the definition, e.g. right-continuous filtrations) and I think that knowing about these reasons can lead to a better understanding of the topic. So I consider it legitimate to ask questions concerning terminology and in fact the tag tag was introduced precisely for these type of questions. So the closure seems incoherent to me and most importantly I consider it a pity.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Maybe it could be useful to clarify whether you're asking about terminology questions in general or about this particular question. (If it is the letter, the tag (specific-question) would be suitable here. See also the tag-info.) As a side note, I think you should be able to cast a reopen vote on that question - if you think that it should be reopened. (That should put the question into the reopen review queue.) $\endgroup$ Jan 22, 2023 at 12:01
  • $\begingroup$ Looking at various tags, the stats for (terminology) don't look too bad. 4.43% of non-deleted questions in this tag is closed and 17.3% of questions in this tag are deleted. $\endgroup$ Jan 22, 2023 at 12:01
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak Thank you for the comments. I decided to make it a discussion about my particular question. $\endgroup$
    – Filippo
    Jan 22, 2023 at 12:25
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ For what it's worth I encountered your question in the review queue this morning and voted to Leave Open as I thought it was well written and asked a pertinent question. You can post in the Reopen thread (math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/34447/… ) to ask for it to be reopened $\endgroup$
    – postmortes
    Jan 22, 2023 at 12:36
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I feel like the close-vote is a little silly because we have the terminology tag for a reason, but here are my thoughts after reading the edits. The absolute continuity statement just seems to be how the author defines their notations. If an author defines a certain notation, then you can't really ask much about it. I probably would have voted to close the question after the second edit, though. Your second edit seems to be a separate question, and you seemed to have acknowledged that after getting those 3 close votes. $\endgroup$ Jan 22, 2023 at 20:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ...and I cast the final vote to reopen it. $\endgroup$
    – mathlander
    Jan 22, 2023 at 21:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Accelerator Thank you for the feedback. The edit was due to Eric Wofsey's comment, which links to this answer. To put it into a nutshell, it says that "$P$ is absolutely continuous w.r.t. $Q$" is (in a particular setting) equivalent to some function being absolutely continuous. This is presumably the reason for this terminology. Since the notation $\ll$ has been abundantly discussed in the comments, I wanted to hear more about this aspect, but the edit was indeed badly received. $\endgroup$
    – Filippo
    Jan 22, 2023 at 22:12
  • $\begingroup$ I addition, I thought that the edit would make the question less "opinion-based". Anyways, I once again saw that it is better to make as few edits as possible and ask a new question instead. $\endgroup$
    – Filippo
    Jan 22, 2023 at 22:21


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .