Corollary
Tag 03IU, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 03IU].
Theory of Sets, chapter II, § 5. Product of a family of sets
Let , be two families of sets and let be a family of functions. If is an injection (resp. surjection) of into , for each , then the extension of to products is an injection (resp. surjection) of into .
(1) Let us assume that for each ; otherwise the result is trivial. Suppose that is injective for each , and let be a retraction of (§ 3, no. 8, Definition 11), so that is the identity mapping of . Let be the extension to products of the family ; since is the extension to products of the family of identity mappings , is the identity mapping of , and hence is injective (§ 3, Proposition 8).
(2) Suppose that is a surjection of onto for each , and let be a section of (§ 3, no. 8, definition 11), so that is the identity mapping of . If is the extension to products of the family , then is the extension to products of the family of identity mappings , and is therefore the identity mapping of ; hence is surjective (§ 3, Proposition 8).
Let be a family of sets, and let be a set. For every mapping of into , is a mapping of into . If is the extension to products of this family of mappings, and if is the diagonal mapping of into , then it is immediate that . Conversely, let be a family of functions such that is a mapping of into for each , and let be the extension to products of this family; then we have for each . By abuse of language, the mapping is also written as . In this way we define a one-to-one mapping of the set onto the set ; this mapping and its inverse are said to be canonical.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.