Conversely, if I∉U,this implies that the complement of I
the slash is used for the setminus operation. I think using \setminus there (which generates a backslash) would be a more standard notation less likely to be mistaken for quotient structures.
I’m familiar with \setminus being used to denote set complements, so \not\in seemed more appropriate to me (I is not an element of U). I interpret I∖U as “the elements of I not in U,” which is the empty set in this case? (also the elements of U are sets of naturals while the elements of I are naturals, so it’s unclear to me how much this makes sense)
Furthermore after
the slash is used for the setminus operation. I think using \setminus there (which generates a backslash) would be a more standard notation less likely to be mistaken for quotient structures.
I’m familiar with \setminus being used to denote set complements, so \not\in seemed more appropriate to me (I is not an element of U). I interpret I∖U as “the elements of I not in U,” which is the empty set in this case? (also the elements of U are sets of naturals while the elements of I are naturals, so it’s unclear to me how much this makes sense)
Sorry, I was quoting the only parts of the sentence.
What I meant was that I would change
to