FOM: Founations of naive category theory?

[Martin Schlottmann]

Solomon Feferman cites

> 
> 1. "Set-theoretical foundations of category theory", in Reports of the
> Midwest Category Seminar III, Lecture Notes in Maths. 106 (1969), 201-247
> (with an Appendix by G. Kreisel).
> 

for an early attempt to provide a set-theoretical
foundation for category theory without using in-
accessible cardinals.

I would like to ask to what extend this approach has
not been successful (if so).

By the way, the appendix of Kreisel can be recommended
for reading to all participants of the set/category debate.

-- 
Martin Schlottmann <martin_schlottmann at math.ualberta.ca>

Department of Mathematical Sciences, CAB 583
University of Alberta, Edmonton AB T6G 2G1, Canada