THthrowaway81523·Dec 25, 2022
Is this supposed to be more accessible than the HoTT textbook that's been maintained on Github for some years? https://github.com/HoTT/book
In Introduction to Homotopy Type TheoryHoTT
book
TeX2013–2022
HoTT / book
book
A textbook on informal homotopy type theory
6Distinct people
7Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
2.2KGitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
A textbook on informal homotopy type theory
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
I don't see Penflip as a replacement for Google Docs, but there are some cases where Docs breaks down - specifically when there are too many collaborators and when the content…
guynamedloren used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by year7 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2013-06-20 20:35:21 UTC to 2022-12-25 09:31:01 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| 2014 | 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2016 | 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
7 sourcesIt has happened before. Some examples are:
- German federal law and regulations: https://github.com/bundestag/gesetze
- DMCA takedown notices: https://github.com/github/dmca
- Map of US districts: https://github.com/benbalter/congressional-districts
- a novel: https://github.com/JJ/hoborg
- a well-known textbook on some niche (homotopy type theory) in mathematics: https://github.com/HoTT/book
- fonts: https://github.com/theleagueof
- Gregorian chants: https://github.com/CMAA/nova-organi-harmonia
Main collaboration functions on a 'repository' (or any set of data / documents that somehow belong together) such as forking and branching are not just only relevant to programming.
(edit: formatting)
In Open Guide to Equity CompensationThe homotopy type theory book was managed over github :
https://github.com/HoTT/book/commit/cb5b01618ac3cf2774430b50...
In Why and How I Wrote My Academic Book in Plain TextInterestingly, the entire source code of the HoTT book is available on github and it is under active development: https://github.com/HoTT/book
In Voevodsky’s Mathematical RevolutionGood advice, thank you. I appreciate it.
On your first two points, this is not too far off from what GitHub does (and what I plan on doing) - the main difference is the nomenclature. You call them notebooks/blogs/documents, I call them projects, GitHub calls them repositories. The model is the same, though. FWIW, I'm calling them 'projects' because it's confusing to have multiple names for essentially the same thing.
The "first one's free" concept is interesting, and something I'm considering. However, I'm not entirely sure I agree with 'no one wants to publish half-finished' - Leanpub (http://www.leanpub.com) is built on this concept, and seems to be successful. Another argument is for open source and community-driven projects [1], which could be considered to be always in an unfinished state.
[1] https://github.com/HoTT/book
In Show HN: A Github for writers?I don't see Penflip as a replacement for Google Docs, but there are some cases where Docs breaks down - specifically when there are too many collaborators and when the content is too complex. Another interesting aspect is the need for multiple versions of the same core content - like a syllabus or textbook - with minor variations and modifications as needed. Something like this is unacheivable with Google Docs.
For small groups working on a short research paper, Google Docs is great. But could you imagine a book being written with Google Docs, especially with multiple people? That'd be completely unmanageable.
I love the HoTT book [1], because it's a great example of using GitHub to write a book with multiple contributors, and really illustrates the shortcomings with other technology [2].
[1] https://github.com/HoTT/book
[2] http://ma
Read the rest
Some direct links:
https://github.com/HoTT/book
http://hottheory.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/hott-online.pdf
http://hottheory.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/hott-ebook.pdf
First commit in Nov '12. Most work seems to be have been done since Jan/Feb '13:
https://github.com/HoTT/book/graphs/commit-activity
In Two dozen mathematicians wrote a 600 page book in 6 months on GitHub