We prove that the category of generalized holomorphically contractible
families possesses maximal and minimal objects. Moreover, we present basic
properties of these extremal families.Comment: 15 page
We continue to discuss the example presented in \cite{JarPfl2015}. In
particular, we clarify some gaps and complete the description of the Shilov
boundary
Let Dj⊂Cnj be a pseudoconvex domain and let Aj⊂Dj be a locally pluriregular set, j=1,...,N. Put X:=j=1⋃NA1×...×Aj−1×Dj×Aj+1×...×AN⊂Cn1×...×CnN=Cn. Let
U⊂Cn be an open neighborhood of X and let M⊂U be a
relatively closed subset of U. For j∈{1,...,N} let Σj be the
set of all (z′,z′′)∈(A1×...×Aj−1)×(Aj+1×...×AN) for which the fiber
M(z′,⋅,z′′):={zj∈Cnj(z′,zj,z′′)∈M} is not
pluripolar. Assume that Σ1,...,ΣN are pluripolar. Put X′:=j=1⋃N{(z′,zj,z′′)∈(A1×...×Aj−1)×Dj×(Aj+1×...×AN)(z′,z′′)∈/Σj}. Then there
exists a relatively closed pluripolar subset M^⊂X^ of the
`envelope of holomorphy' X^⊂Cn of X such that: M^∩X′⊂M, for every function f separately holomorphic on X∖M
there exists exactly one function f^ holomorphic on X^∖M^ with f^=f on X′∖M, and M^ is singular with respect to
the family of all functions f^. Some special cases were previously
studied in \cite{Jar-Pfl 2001c}.Comment: 19 page