On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 09:18 -0600, Tommy Reynolds wrote: > Uttered Karsten Wade <kwade@xxxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > > > I wonder ... if it is clearly marked as being a non-legal approved > > translation, will that work? > > IANAL* > > A non-legal legal notice? Equally well as an empty paragraph, I would > suppose; probably not worth the trouble. The more I think about this, the more I want to save us from wasting anyone's time. I've asked Sarah Wang and Greg DeKoenigsberg to help be resolve this. Ultimately, the translation decision does not lie within the FDP. Also, we need to update the legalnotice. If you look at this: http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/legalnotice.html versus this http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/fc4/errata/#sn-legalnotice You'll notice that the RHEL notice says, "All other trademarks referenced herein are the property of their respective owners." That is instead of tracking all the nuances of all the different trademarks we use. That language is lawyer-approved, and saves us much hassle. This means, once we translate the legalnotice, we won't have to again for a long time ... I hope. I'll make this change in HEAD. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41 Red Hat SELinux Guide http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
