Re: Legal language (was: Which E-mail Disclaimer is Best?)

["Lurker writer" <lurker_writer -at- hotmail -dot- com>]

Geoff said:

lawyers claim that legal wording is designed to be clear to the
point that its meaning _cannot_ be mistaken

He makes a good point, because there's a parallel with writing 
specifications. The best method for designing clear, unambiguous 
requirements in a specification is through the use of a formal language, 
such as Z. It's based on logic and set theory that renders the content 
absolute in its meaning; i.e., it means the same thing to everyone who can 
understand it. Problem is, not a whole lot of people can understand it, but 
there's no ambiguity in meaning.

Most specs are written in an informal language. The tradeoff is that it's 
easier for the masses to read and understand, but the ambiguity risk 
increases dramatically.

So, it is presumed, legal documents are written by lawyers for those who 
understand the language used: other lawyers.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com

Sponsored by Cub Lea, specialist in low-cost outsourced development
and documentation. Overload and time-sensitive jobs at exceptional
rates. Unique free gifts for all visitors to http://www.cublea.com

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.