Talk:Khovanov homology

Untitled
I removed the statement "Khovanov's original formulation is slightly more general." following "This definition follows the formalism given in Dror Bar-Natan's paper." I'm presuming that this comment refers to the fact that Khovanov's original formulation was defined over Z[c], with c^2=0. Since then, it's been generally agreed that this c doesn't do much; in particular the resulting theory isn't functorial. --ScottMorrison 05:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

As V is given as a vector space, axiom 1 should be: [\phi]=0->k->0, with the ground field k in degree 0 and at height 0. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.12.165 (talk) 18:23, 1 October 2015 (UTC)