Re: Thieves Philosophy 101

[tturner@ecn.ab.ca ()]

olcott (olcott@qwest.net) wrote:
: Quantum_Cat wrote:
<snip>

: >  *>It was not a conditional OR, it was a conditional AND,
: >
: > Odd... Conditional AND's generally have the word AND in them.  ;)

: In Math books YES, in Law Books No...
: In Law Books the conditional AND is by recursive
: specification. Since the word Property is explicitly
<snip>

--> When our Contracts & Administration unit writes a Call Letter,
    RFP or in the resultant contract between all parties involved;
    there is liberal usage of `and/or' for clarity between clients
    and contractors, sub-contractors, etc. `Or' by itself is quite 
    acceptable; but there have sufficient misunderstandings in the
    past - expensive ones - in time and/or money; that `or' is not
    used by itself anymore, in any case that it may not be seen as
    meaning `and', when, in fact, this is what is being specified.
    
    The courts have always come down on our side but the resultant
    losses were sometimes more harmful to our clients - than if we
    adapted the contract-wording to accomodate any such accidental
    misunderstandings. Not quite a `Clarica' advert, but it helped.

--
E.A.G.L.E Librarian A3 BBS:403/481-3133  email:tturner@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca