Example 1: glossary
----components
glossary:
term [short text]
part [optional; choice: 'n','v','adj','adv','prep','pron','conj','int']
# part of speech: noun, verb, adjective, ....
definition [text]
----layout
# {var} refers to the value of "var"
# anythign not in {curly brackets} is literal
# In the display, {func(xxxx)} is the value of ther
# function func(), where func() is a function defined
# in the display specification. In the edit form,
# {func(xxxx)} is just xxxx.
[[{term}; {#1} [{part}; \[{#1}\]]][{definition}; {#1}]]
# another way to write this is:
arrangement:
[[{term}; {#1} [{part}; \[{#1}\]]]
[{definition}; {#1}]]
order:
term: alphabetical
# the layout is described by [square brackets], so you
need a backslash to indicate literal square brackets: \[\]
# need to indicate the order. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
----display
css:
term {font-weight:bold; width:100px}
part {font-weight:normal; font-style: italics}
#Note: items of type 'text' are automatically processed to
# have a blank line in the text appear as a blank line in the html.
----example data
(term:'spaghetti';definition:'long noodles used in Italian food')
(term:'twirl';definition:'to gather noodles on a fork with a rotating motion';
part:'v')
----the results
spaghetti
long noodles used in Italian food
to gather noodles on a fork with a rotating motion
=================================
Example 2: Math research problems
----components
problem:
id [identifier]
type [choice: 'Problem','Conjecture'; default:'Problem']
number [optional; short text]
attribution [optional; short text]
lead-in [optional; text]
statement [text]
status [optional; text]
remark [optional; repeatable; remark]
arrangeable # meaning that the user can drag-and-drop to rearrange the blocks
remark:
id [identifier]
problem [reference: problem.id]
attribution [optional; short text]
statement [text]
arrangeable
----layout
[
[{lead-in}; {#1}]
[
[{type}; {#1} [{number}; {#1}.]]
[{attribution}; \[{#1}\]]
[{statement}; {#1}]
]
[{status}; {#1}]
[{remark}; Remark. [{#1.attribution}; #2]]
[{#1.statement}; #2]
]
----display
css:
problem {padding: 0 0 10px 0}
lead-in {padding: 0 0 10px 0}
status {padding: 10px 0 0 0}
remark {padding: 10px 0 0 0}
type {font-weight:bold; padding:0 5px 0 0}
number {font-weight:bold; padding:0 10px 0 0}
attribution {font-weight:normal;padding:0 10px 0 0}
statement {font-weight:normal; font-style: italic; padding: 0 0 40px 0}
----example data
(
type:'Problem';
number: '1.1':';
attribution: 'Rips';
statement: 'Is there a JSJ decomposition for finitely presented groups
over small groups?';
remark: [ [statement:'Dunwoody
has announced recently a much more general result for groups
acting on $\mathbb R$-trees that seems to imply the existence of JSJ
decompositions over small groups. Guirardel and Levitt have also
proposed a generalized JSJ theory in the spirit of outer space
\cite{MR2319455}.'],
[statement: 'The first case to look at is the case of
decompositions over solvable Baumslag-Solitar groups. If such a
decomposition exists then the edge groups of the decomposition
won't necessarily be small (see \cite{MR2221253}). On the other
hand there is a natural conjecture for the enclosing groups: one
expects them to be fundamental groups of complexes of groups where
the underlying complex is a square complex homeomorphic to a
surface and all edges and faces are stabilized by a fixed group
$F$ (the fiber). However the homomorphisms from edge groups to
face groups are not necessarily isomorphisms.']]
)
(
number: '1.2';
attribution: 'Panos Papasoglu';
lead-in: 'We call a splitting of $G$ over $C$ \emph{unfolded} if $G$
does not split over any proper subgroup of $C$.';
statement: 'Let $G$ be a finitely presented group that does not
split over a virtually abelian group. Can $G$ have infinitely many unfolded
splittings over distinct subgroups isomorphic to ${\mathbb F}_2$?';
status: 'This is just a test status statement';
remark: [ [statement:'A splitting of a group $G$ over a group $C_1$ is called
\emph{elliptic}
with respect to a splitting of $G$ over $C_2$ if $C_1$ fixes a
point of the Bass-Serre tree of the splitting over $C_2$.
Otherwise it is called hyperbolic.
A pair of splittings of $G$ over $C_1,C_2$ can be
elliptic-elliptic, elliptic-hyperbolic, hyperbolic-elliptic,
hyperbolic-hyperbolic.
A crucial observation for the JSJ theory of splittings of 1-ended
finitely presented groups over $\mathbb Z$ is that any two splittings
over infinite cyclic groups $C_1,C_2$ are either elliptic-elliptic
or hyperbolic-hyperbolic.
The Bestvina-Feighn accessibility theorem (\cite{MR1091614}) gives
a bound on the number of elliptic-elliptic splittings over $\mathbb Z$
(and more generally over small groups). So the main issue for
the JSJ theory is understanding hyperbolic-hyperbolic splittings.
In the case of $\mathbb Z$-splittings it is easy to produce
infinitely many distinct hyperbolic-hyperbolic splittings, just
consider the splittings corresponding to simple closed curves on a
surface. The JSJ theory says that in fact this is the only way in
which such splittings arise. So the problem above asks whether
there are families of hyperbolic-hyperbolic splittings over the
free group of rank 2, ${\mathbb F}_2$.
']]
----------- the results
Problem 1.1
[Rips]
Is there a JSJ decomposition for finitely
presented groups over small groups?
We call a splitting of $G$ over $C$ \emph{unfolded} if $G$
does not split over any proper subgroup of $C$.
Problem 1.2
[Panos Papasoglu]
Let $G$ be a finitely presented group that does not
split over a virtually abelian group. Can $G$ have infinitely many unfolded
splittings over distinct subgroups isomorphic to ${\mathbb F}_2$?
This is just a test status statement