Definition talk:Isomorphism of Categories

In the past we haven't bothered to create separate definition pages for "isomorphism" and "isomorphic", merely adding the definition for "isomorphic" as part of the same page as "isomorphism". If we want to retain consistency of approach, we will need either to merge "Isomorphic Categories" into this one or separate out all the other definitions of isomorphism into their two separate parts (and consequently amend all the links in question as well). --prime mover (talk) 13:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's probably best in any case. Have moved the two respective instances to subpages with redirects. --Lord_Farin (talk) 14:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Rename suggestion

Mac Lane gives "isomorphism of categories". Awodey uses this phrase a few times as well, but awkwardly enough doesn't define the concept (perhaps taking it for granted as interpreted in $\mathbf{Cat}$). Most sources seem to write "isomorphism", taking the "category" part understood. I've never seen "Category isomorphism" anywhere, and it's awkward to pronounce. I vote against the move. --Lord_Farin (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

No worries then ... IMO "isomorphism of categories" is more awkward - but source works trump all. --prime mover (talk) 17:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)