|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Correction to 'equilateral triangle'
|
Ambiguity by rm50
Correction id: 12373
Filed on: 2007-06-09 15:27:58
Status: Accepted on 2007-06-09 15:55:13
Type: Meta/Minor
Correction text:
It might be clearer to say "each pair of" instead of "any". "Any" could be interpreted to mean "some pair of", which is definitely not what was meant. I have made this correction, which was accepted, against both "regular" and "equiangular".
By the way, with regard to the fact that there are three entries for this concept, it would be nice to include a reference to a description of some geometry in which ASA does not hold, and to create such an entry if one does not exist. If there is no such geometry, perhaps this can all be simplified.
Roger |
Comment from object owner Mathprof:
It might be clearer to say "each pair of" instead of "any". "Any" could be interpreted to mean "some pair of", which is definitely not what was meant. I have made this correction, which was accepted, against both "regular" and "equiangular".
By the way, with regard to the fact that there are three entries for this concept, it would be nice to include a reference to a description of some geometry in which ASA does not hold, and to create such an entry if one does not exist. If there is no such geometry, perhaps this can all be simplified.
Roger
I made the change. I am not aware of a geometry in which ASA does not hold. There is however a geometry in which base angles of an isosceles triange are not equal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
