Re: Documentation of transient-mark-mode is sloppy, wrong, and confused.

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

Eli Zaretskii writes:
 > > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
 > > Eli Zaretskii writes:
 > > 
 > >  > > > email.  Sorry for the poor wording - it's late and I'm tired.
 > >  > > 
 > >  > > I would find this fairly confusing
 > >  > 
 > >  > So would I.  If you read this text carefully, it actually says
 > >  > something like "the region is active when Emacs marks it as active."
 > >  > That's hardly a definition of what "active" is.
 > > 
 > > Read a little more carefully.  It also explains how the behavior of
 > > Emacs changes when the mark is active.  That *is* a definition of 
 > > "active".
 > 
 > Right, but that "definition-through-behavior" was exactly what Alan
 > opposed to in the first place!

No.  Alan objected to d-t-b where "behavior" refers to "how to make
Emacs 'activate' the mark" (behavior changes activity).  What he wants
is "how does Emacs's behavior change when the mark is 'active'?"
(activity changes behavior).  These are quite different.