Re: [whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
On 29/08/2011, at 7:18 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: In the UndoManager spec http://rniwa.com/editing/undomanager.html, there are two types of transactions: managed and manual. Managed transactions are handled by the browser, while manual ones are handled by the author. The term managed keeps confusing me, though. I never remember if it means managed by the browser, or by the author. Why don't you rename managed transactions to automatic transactions or something like that? it could be implicit\explicit transactions. for me, 'manual' is the non-ambiguous term. cam
Re: [whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
Le 30 août 2011 à 02:39, Anne van Kesteren a écrit : Or user agent transaction and author transaction. (XMLHttpRequest e.g. uses author request headers.) In version UndoManager and DOM Transaction Proposal Working Draft — 9 August 2011 Suggestion: A managed transaction is a transaction where DOM changes is tracked by the user agent and the logic to unapply or reapply the transaction is implicitly created by the user agent. - user agent transaction A manual transaction is a transaction where the logic to apply, unapply, or reapply the transaction is explicitly defined by an application. /by an application/by a(n author) script/ - (author) script transaction ps: I would not put author personally. -- Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/ Developer Relations Tools, Opera Software
Re: [whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@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. 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?
Re: [whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
On 11-08-30 12:23 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwarn...@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
Re: [whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Ehsan Akhgari eh...@mozilla.com wrote: On 11-08-30 12:23 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwarn...@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
Re: [whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Ehsan Akhgari eh...@mozilla.com wrote: 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! So do I. - Ryosuke
[whatwg] Terminology: managed vs. manual transactions
In the UndoManager spec http://rniwa.com/editing/undomanager.html, there are two types of transactions: managed and manual. Managed transactions are handled by the browser, while manual ones are handled by the author. The term managed keeps confusing me, though. I never remember if it means managed by the browser, or by the author. Why don't you rename managed transactions to automatic transactions or something like that?
