Writing
When selecting a topic of discussion for definition, I was concerned about the interconnected nature of computer science terminology. Unlike with psychology, computer science terms usually can’t be explained out of context, because they often rely on a number of other definitions. Even worse, some of the terms exist in common parlance, but mean different things. For example, I was continuously tempted to use the term “class” when discussing refactoring, as managing classes is one of the most important goals in refactoring. However, people unfamiliar with the jargon may interpret that word with one of its other definitions, and even were they to guess that it refers to a grouping of related content, I would have to give yet another expanded definition to explain what they do. The only other difficulty I believe I had was with the diagram – the diagram shows an object-oriented UML (Unified Modeling Language) diagram, which is really the only visual way of representing the concept. However, this language has its own conventions, which may not be clear without explanation.
Reviewing
The review process was interesting, though a bit difficult to manage as I already had some grasp of the concept, having picked up on it from the news and the like. My primary goal when editing writing is to ensure that there is a developmental flow, which was rather well done in the reviewed definition. Beyond that, many of the suggested improvements were on things that were perhaps not totally clear to a novice, or possible expansion that may or may not have been relevant. I was comfortable with the core structure of Hadleigh’s writing, and in spite of a handful of grammatical errors or potential rephrasings that I might have suggested if this were an edit rather than a review, there wasn’t much that needed change.
Editing
I wasn’t given many suggestions there, and several of them were things I already knew to be true; for example, there was a typo resulting from my haste to submit before the deadline, and that was a natural correction. Other than that, there were really only a few minor additional explanations about when and why refactoring is done, and a quick explanation of an unavoidable term that I hadn’t quite fleshed out. It didn’t really take much effort, so all I can really say here is that my definitions appear to be successful enough to only require minor edits.