On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Ehsan Akhgari <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11-08-30 12:23 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Ryosuke Niwa<[email protected]> 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
