Jamie Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, remember that there are four distinct parts to language
comprehension.
Reading, writing, listening, and speaking.
Perhaps you feel I don't understand this, but as I deal with this on a
daily basis, I assure you I
Jamie Jones wrote:
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 13:27 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:30:50PM +1000, Jamie Jones wrote:
In the event of any license related issues perhaps caused by
mis-translation, the Japanese version is the canonical version that must
be followed.
Isn't this
Jamie Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Based on my understanding of Japanese law, the original document being
in Japanese is the one that is legally binding, even if the author makes
an English translation. Other jurisdictions may accept a hypothetical
English
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 15:22 -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
Jamie Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Based on my understanding of Japanese law, the original document being
in Japanese is the one that is legally binding, even if the author makes
an English translation.
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 15:21 -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
Jamie Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Only if an adequate
English version was available [1], pruning the Japanese docs would be
an option IMO (and only because ~99.9% of Japanese people have good
On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 14:52 +0800, Ying-Chun Liu wrote:
Jamie Jones wrote:
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 13:27 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:30:50PM +1000, Jamie Jones wrote:
In the event of any license related issues perhaps caused by
mis-translation, the Japanese
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 22:10 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:32:18PM +0800, Ying-Chun Liu wrote:
Second, the javadoc documents coming with the source files are Japanese.
Should I prune the documents or include them? How do I include them?
Please, keep them. Removing
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:30:50PM +1000, Jamie Jones wrote:
In the event of any license related issues perhaps caused by
mis-translation, the Japanese version is the canonical version that must
be followed.
Isn't this the case only if someone else than the author translated
the license?
--
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 13:27 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:30:50PM +1000, Jamie Jones wrote:
In the event of any license related issues perhaps caused by
mis-translation, the Japanese version is the canonical version that must
be followed.
Isn't this the case only
Jamie Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Only if an adequate
English version was available [1], pruning the Japanese docs would be
an option IMO (and only because ~99.9% of Japanese people have good
command of English).
You must have a very different
Dear all,
I intend to package libjlha-java which can be downloaded from
http://homepage1.nifty.com/dangan/Content/Program/Java/jLHA/LhaLibrary.html
. There is a english license written on
http://homepage1.nifty.com/dangan/en/Content/Program/Java/jLHA/LhaLibrary.html
and it is a free software
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:32:18PM +0800, Ying-Chun Liu wrote:
Second, the javadoc documents coming with the source files are Japanese.
Should I prune the documents or include them? How do I include them?
Please, keep them. Removing documentation is a disservice to the
users, even if only a
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:10:47PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:32:18PM +0800, Ying-Chun Liu wrote:
Second, the javadoc documents coming with the source files are Japanese.
Should I prune the documents or include them? How do I include them?
Please, keep them.
13 matches
Mail list logo
