Talk:space

The mathematical definition is definitley too restricted (it's basically the definition of a vector space)- I'm wondering if a modification of the definition given in wp wouldn't be better: "a set, with some particular properties and usually some additional structure; the exact formulation of which depends on the space in question" \Mike 10:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

RFC discussion: October 2012
The wording of some of the definitions does not communicate meaning well, especially in the absence of usage examples, usage contexts, or citations. Some of the definitions seem to be attempting some kind of technical accuracy, but achieve it only at the expense of intelligibility. I have made some changes, but more is needed. A tip of the hat to the anon who commented at Feedback. DCDuring TALK 03:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I have had a go at sense#5. It was,
 * The volume beyond the atmosphere of planets that consists of a relative vacuum.
 * and is now,
 * The near-vacuum between planets and stars.
 * The satellite was launched into space in August
 * ''The Hubble telescope was a major advance in the exploration of deep space
 * In my opinion, sense#6 is the same meaning and should be combined. It is tne technical definition used by NASA, but refers to the same thing.  Or even removed as encyclopaedic.
 * I have also amended sense#1 which was,
 * The intervening contents of a volume.
 * and is now,
 * A volume, or an empty volume.
 * It is not possible to stack eggs without spaces between them whereas it is possible to stack bricks without spaces
 * However, my definition is clearly not uncountable, as originally stated, so I might be missing something here.
 * The geometry sense also needs some work. Spinning Spark  11:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Sense#4 and sense#13 also seem to be identical. Spinning Spark  11:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Lots of work has been done on this one, and I'm going to call it closed now. (I did my best to match up the old translation tables to the newly-defined senses; hopefully not too much got lost in transfer.) Ƿidsiþ 08:22, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

RFC discussion: October 2014
I think the "Derived terms" and "Related terms" need some attention. In my opinion, most if not all entries under "Related terms" are actually "Derived terms". Donnanz (talk) 20:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I have tackled this myself, putting everything under one heading (derived terms), and have removed the rfc. If anyone disagrees, they are welcome to change it. Donnanz (talk) 14:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Is derived from  or from Latin ? It's not exactly a massive issue. Renard Migrant (talk) 11:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * DCDuring has just done some work on this, but both space and spatial are derived from apparently. Donnanz (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Spatial was apparently coined in English as space + al, but modified to look like it could be from the imaginary Latin spatialis. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Possibly missing an abstract sense
What about e.g. a "vowel space" (the conceptual area in which a person's spoken vowels exist)? I suppose one of the italicised supersenses might cover it, I've never totally understood whether those count as senses in themselves, but I don't think any of the individual concrete senses does. Equinox ◑ 03:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Other terms formed with "space"
Where would one list terms such as classifying space, safe space, Teichmüller space, and topological space? Hyponyms, Related terms? This question may relate to the question above about an abstract sense of "space," giving as example, vowel space. --A12n (talk) 12:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


 * You should use Derived terms. Equinox ◑ 14:52, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks! --A12n (talk) 05:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)