I want to define a notion of cartesian equipment, the idea being that a bicategory should be a cartesian bicategory if and only if the proarrow equipment is a cartesian equipment.
With the correct notion of equipment, there are two possible notions of adjoint morphisms, and hence limits: those of Carboni–Kelly–Verity–Wood, and those of Grandis–Paré (for double categories).
Question: Do these notions coincide?
Then a cartesian equipment will be an equipment that ‘has finite products’, that is an equipment for which the diagonals and have right pseudoadjoints.