A square is a special rectangle, but it IS a rectangle. I just googled it last night, nowhere in any of the definitions does it say that a rectangle has to have any requirements on side lengths. Its just has to have all 4 corners at 90 degreees. There is differentiation, the square is a subset or special rectangle, but to say a square is NOT a rectangle is not correct per any definition geometric or otherwise. I dont know where you are getting this UNequal adjacent length requirement from, but its not case. thats the crux of the argument. Squares and rectangles are not exclusive, squares are just a special rectangle with all four sides equal lenght.
JC O'Connell [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of keith_w Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 2:57 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Amusing square-format dSLR rumor Larry Colen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 09:50:16PM -0500, JC OConnell wrote: # Whiz? > In what class?, remedial school? # > # a square IS a rectangle. a square photo format is still a rectangular > # format. > # its just a rectangle with all four sides equal length. > Oh, c'mon now. Next thing you'll be telling us that a square is a > rhombus, or a trapezoid. While all 4 corners of both a square and a rectangle must be 90 degrees, the commonly accepted (preferred) definition states that a rectangle has adjacent sides of UNequal length. I think it's really stretching it to call a square a rectangle, since a square's sides MUST be of equal length. I'm in favor of differentiating the two. I mean, if I was asked... :-D keith whaley -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
