TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: War - Teminology From:Sally Marquigny <SALLYM -at- MSMAILHQ -dot- NETIMAGE -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 9 Nov 1994 16:49:00 PST
[Forgive me for posting this to the list, but my message bounced back when I
sent it to Paul personally & I think it's not entirely irrelevant to others
of us.]
I think you have meandered outside the realm of writing and into the world
of law. Before you go changing the terminology on a clause like this, I
think you should check with the Plan's legal counsel.
Sally Marquigny Network Imaging Systems
sallym -at- msmailhq -dot- netimage -dot- com Herndon, VA
------------
Paul Strandlund said:
I am currently writing a practice to update our Disability Income Plan
information and I have a serious question for you.
There is one part that says coverage is void and no benefits will be paid if
disability occurs due to war or any act of war (whether war is declared or
not).
Maybe it's just me but for an act of war to be an act of war it must be
declared
as such. Example being Vietnam - it was officially a police action because
it
was never declared a war.
I also have backup on this one (for a change) Webster's Ninth New Collegiate
Dictionary says "war...1 a (1): a state of usu. open and declared armed
hostile
conflict between states or nations ...". This says to me that war must be
decalred
to be an act of war.
