[conv.rank] p1.10 Improve the definition of comparing ranks

[conv.rank] p1.10 says

For all integer types T1, T2, and T3, if T1 has greater rank than T2 and T2 has greater rank than T3, then T1 has greater rank than T3.

This definition only gives the approach of comparing indirect "greater" relationships. It also hints that we cannot assume that the mathematic comparison relationships can apply to these concepts. In other words, we didn't give a complete definition of how to compare the "transitive" comparable relationships. For instance

[conv.rank] p1.3 says that the rank of long int is greater than the rank of int

and

[conv.rank] p1.4 says that the rank of int equals the rank of unsigned int.

So, how to compare the rank of long int and the rank of unsigned int? They're not the concept in the mathematical domain. Hence, I think we should augment [conv.rank] p1.10 to assign them concrete definitions. The addition part may be that

If T1 has a greater rank than T2 and T2 equals T3, then T1 has a greater rank than T3. Conversely, if T1 has less rank than T2 and T2 equals T3, then T1 has less rank than T3.

Read [conv.rank] p1.3, p1.4, and p1.10 in the draft to understand the existing rank relationships. Evaluate whether the proposed greater/lesser and equality wording completely defines transitive comparisons, then verify that the resulting standard wording is consistent and unambiguous.