W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2011

[whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions

From: Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:55:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4E5D3215.2020709@mozilla.com>
On 11-08-30 12:23 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwa<rniwa at webkit.org>  wrote:
>> Mn... I've never had that problem.  e.g. .net framework uses the term
>> "managed code" to mean the code that's garbage-collected by the framework
>> and "unmanaged code" to mean the code that manually manage memory among
>> other things.
>
> That's true, but many web authors aren't going to be familiar with
> .NET, or any non-garbage-collected language.  "Managed" definitely
> sounds ambiguous to me, and I've been exposed to more
> non-garbage-collected code than most web authors.

I agree with Aryeh.  Also, note that the term "managed code" means more 
than just the memory being garbage collected.

>> Mn... Jonas requested that I add separate method on undoManager for manual
>> and managed transactions so I'd rather not name one of them
>> userAgentTransact since the term "user agent" doesn't seem to be popular
>> outside of standard bodies.
>
> I agree that "user agent" is a very standards-y term.  Maybe
> "browser-managed transaction" and "script-managed transaction"?

Isn't the main difference between the two transactions the fact that the 
browser knows how to undo/redo "managed" transactions, whereas the 
author explicitly specifies how to undo/redo "manual" transactions?  In 
this case, why wouldn't we go with a terminology like "automatic"/"manual"?

Cheers,
Ehsan
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2011 11:55:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:35 UTC