Re: Placement of list within an interactive clause

[Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com>]

> 2. interactional, interactive -- (capable of acting on or influencing each other)
>
> And it is obvious that definition number 2 fits into what we are
> speaking about.
>
> If I think of who or what is "each other", maybe those are functions,
> maybe screen, thus majority of functions could be said to be
> interactive by English language context.
>
> If function changes color of Emacs editor, it is interactive. If it
> influences other function it is interactive. Do we need to consider
> "interactive" only if it influences human? It influences 2 parties or
> things, it is not clear quite, it is "each other". If function
> influences computer time, it is interactive.


If what is meant in any interaction influencing one thing with another, then everything
is interactive.  The result is that the use of interactive ends up having no value, because
of its inability to discriminate anything.

For this reason, interactive should represent a specific thing, specifically user-interactive.
Because emacs is fundamentally a user defined environment that accepts user input during run-time.
I personally distinguish traditional coding directed towards automation, and functionalities
that interact directly with the user in the form of text.  In this context I do not consider taking
the position of a region as user-interactive because the user is mostly oblivious to those numeric
details.



> Is the definition really that what we are talking about?

> --
> Jean