Thanks. I've found a lot of category explanations that use Haskell types in their explanation, and then a lot of Haskell types that use the jargon in their def

Thanks. I've found a lot of category explanations that use Haskell types in their explanation, and then a lot of Haskell types that use the jargon in their definition. It's hard to find a foothold from which to build understanding. This is perfect.