On #15635 <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15635>, we are trying to decide whether we want non-associative algebras to be included in the catalog of algebras.
The argument against including them is "most" people think of algebras as being associative (and maybe even unital), and as such, might surprise people when they come across the non-associativity in their computations. However, the community was at one point considering renaming magmatic algebras into algebras and having to specify the associative axiom explicitly. There is also a counterpoint to the argument for not including non-associative algebras in the catalog in that the naming is clear, it gives a uniform entry point and easily discoverable, and usually when someone doesn't know what a particular object is, they look at the documentation. We would like to hear your thoughts on the matter, Travis -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
