Aggregation is an abstraction concept for building composite objects from their component objects. ... the possibility of combining objects that are related by a particular relationship instance into a higher-level aggregate object. This is sometimes useful when the higher-level aggregate object is itself to be related to another object. We call the relationship between the primitive objects and their aggregate object IS-A-PART-OF; the inverse is called IS-A-COMPONENT-OF. UML provides for all three types of aggregation.
Here in the last sentence "the inverse is called IS-A-COMPONENT-OF" is a mistake?. Are "IS-A-COMPONENT-OF" and "IS-A-PART-OF" the same thing? If so what should we call an inverse?