2 ms·
I am not a native speaker of English. In http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/comprise_compose.htm http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/comp
by gloriousDetails 12y ago
I am not a native speaker of English. In http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/comprise_compose.htm http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/comprise_comp... the difference is:
Make sure you name all the constituent parts when using comprise or compose. The word to use when other elements are may also be present is include.
The elements one, two, and three composed the set {1,2,3}.
The set {1,2,3} is comprised of three elements.
The set {1,2,3,4} includes the elements one, two and three.
- gloriousDetails 12y agoIn http://www.thefreedictionary.com/include http://www.thefreedictionary.com/include all this is clarified, the botton line or golden rule of usage (edited). Some writers insist that include be used only when it is followed by a partial list of the contend of the reference of the subject. This restriction is too strong. The use of comprise or consist of will avoid ambiguity when a listing is meant to be exhaustive.
- quickaccount 12y agoI agree that it's the opposite of standard usage but that's how it's interpreted in patent language. Here's a quote straight from the USPTO website: "The transitional term “comprising”, which is synonymous with “including,” “containing,” or “characterized by,” is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps." http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2111.html http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2111.html There are other non-standard interpretations in patent language. For example, "a" or "an" is not necessarily a singular but can mean "one or more". Also the inventor is free to provide their own definitions for words they use in the patent specification.