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

[whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 19:12:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei_xWoNvA+7kYa8_ZNLypYu51C+VFBdOaPgeAV=uNTMJzw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan at mozilla.com> wrote:
> 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"?

I like that!

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2011 19:12:57 UTC

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