Actually, I would go for the biconditional, as Mario suggests, since it's always nicer to have a characterization. The useful part is indeed the forward implication, since the reverse implication is always true and obvious and easy to prove, but I think this is not a reason to keep it out of set.mm
Benoît -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metamath" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/8e411211-d9ac-4c72-8955-fb28ded97b96%40googlegroups.com.
