Hawking and Ellis write about the difficulty of describing the shape of a singularity when presented with a manifold that has curves of finite length that don't reach a point in the manifold.
[Investigating/defining what is] meant by the size, shape, location, and so on of a singularity [...] would be fairly easy if the singular points were included in the manifold. However it would be impossible to determine the manifold structure at such points by physical measurements. In fact there would be many manifold structures which agreed for the non-singular regions but which differed for the singular points. For example, the manifold at the $t=0$ singularity in the Robertson-Walker solutions could be that described by the coordinates $$\{t, r\cos \theta, r\sin\theta\cos \phi, r\sin\theta\sin \phi\}$$ or that described by $$\{t, Sr\cos \theta, S r\sin\theta\cos \phi, Sr\sin\theta\sin \phi\}.$$ In the first case the singularity would be a three-surface, in the second case a single point.
Of course, as a physicist I'm sensitive to anything that couldn't be resolved by physical measurements. But I don't actually see the example.
Can anyone explain how two different coordinates yield a differently shaped singularity?