The verb "comprise" comes to me naturally to use in certain situations, at odds with a legalistic sense of correctness. It's a word often used in patents, or patent applicaitons, where some invention or device is said to "comprise" several parts.
I would say from reading (just for example) some of those patents or patent applications, that the several claims that are often made in conjunction could equally well be said to "comprise" the invention.
Is that incorrect?
The word "comprise" is to me very similar in origin and meaning to another word in English: "comprehend" -- comprender in Spanish or comprendre in French -- meaning to grasp or encompass in a certain formal sense.
If two things, or two expressions of things, are being claimed or said to be "equal" -- then it should be equally valid to claim either expression to "comprise" or to "be comprised of" the other.
Is this considered wrong?
(Also for example "to possess" and "to be possessed of" are sometimes used interchangeably as well, the latter perhaps more for real than personal property.)