Perhaps you could start off, or finish, by mentioning something along the lines of: (Nor would you do that if paraphrasing something in writing.) I don't think there would be any reason to say unnamed or redacted as an adjective every time you would otherwise say something. For example, you can use redaction to eliminate or mask sensitive personal information such as credit card numbers, phone numbers, or email addresses from documents. That doesn't name the person or his rank. Redaction is the process of eliminating or obscuring portions of a document as you read it from the database. "The meeting was led by somebody and his men." In speech (I wasn't sure if when you said how should I say it, you were talking about speaking about something redacted), unless you are actually reading a redacted document, I imagine that you refer to the person or situation in exactly the same way as if information about them or it isn't known in the first place. I imagine you would need to refer to the "redaction guide" of whatever agency you work for to determine what its own guidelines are. On the other hand, I've seen news stations present redacted documents to viewers in which the words or phrases are simply blacked out or otherwise hidden. To maintain the formatting or structure of the document the word and square brackets ‘’ can be repeated, for example, ‘ ’.īased purely on this Australian guideline, your sentence would become: 1 - a real-world redacted document from AstraZeneca. For example, “the funds were transferred to the applicant’s nominated bank account BSB Account number ”. A typical example of such usage would be where the HR department uses redaction to suppress. Text or numbers that need redacting should be replaced with the word redacted in square brackets. Different organizations and governments will use different methods.įor instance, here's what the Federal Court of Australia says in its "Guide to Redacting Documents in Electronic Form":
0 kommentar(er)
