[pas]

It seems there's room for "legal innovation" there, by providing definitions early on in various texts to disambiguate, and then sticking to them throughout the text!?

I assume it's already done anyway for some terms. Why isn't this more widespread?

[mannykannot]

Innovation is quite often resisted by those who have mastered the hard way of doing things, though I have no idea whether this is the case here.

[fenomas]

I suppose for the same reason that law in English-speaking countries still uses so much Latin?

[pas]

But that's the opposite of innovation? Basically, instead of describing things in detail drafters opt to use shortcuts, but that's how people end up getting fucked in court by some "technicality".

Innovation would be to just put in the verbiage, precisely define terms, fuck tradition.

[hollerith]

The Latin (and Old French) words don't require a complicated arrangement to type them on a keyboard.

[Tor3]

For what it's worth, writing Japanese on a normal keyboard is easy, even for me. Fast too. And my wife is super-fast. I have no knowledge of how this is done in Chinese, or Korean for that matter (not to mention other non-Latin languages like Arabic, Thai or Hebrew), but for Japanese it's easy. There are two main ways of doing it, some prefer one, some the other.