Great intention, for sure. But doesn't that make the situation even more complex? You'd have to account for scenarios like "I agreed to what was mentioned in the Simple English!" versus "Well, no, you agreed to the legalise. The Simple English and raw versions have no technical relation to one another" in cases where the Simple English version fails to mention some sort of feature or caveat.

Yes, I imagine that would happen. Lawyers write in that convoluted way in order not to be misinterpreted. Ironic huh?

The law is an ass.

Best,

Andy

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Andy Polaine

Research | Writing | Strategy
Interaction Concept Design
Education Futures

Twitter: apolaine
Skype: apolaine

http://playpen.polaine.com
http://www.designersreviewofbooks.com
http://www.omnium.net.au
http://www.antirom.com
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to