I have learned a long time ago (when PC's where still a rumour) that information is data that is usable (the definition was a bit longer). It came down to the idea that a phonebook contains a lot of data, but only the number I look up in it is considered information.
This definition can still be used in a strict sense, but in practice, I notice that information often describes something, whereas data refers to "stuff" that belongs to and is used by or in an application.
So Code and Application information could be two things (your Q2 — it can mean both):
- The code that makes up the application and information about the application.
- Information about both the code that makes up the application and about the application itself.
The explicit exclusion of Application data refers to the data that is used inside the application, such as user generated content, default data, screen layouts, up to a complete database.
The difference is mainly in the fact that application data can be a lot of data, and it is normally only accessible by the application itself. The information in your "card content" is the information that is needed to execute the application, but it does not contains the data that is used by the application.
A manner is a way of doing something. The way in which any individual behaves is described generally as his manner. You often see phrases such as "He has the manner of a gentleman". It describes a person's bearing as well as behaviour.
Etiquette is a set of rules defining the manner in which certain events or situations should be performed. Thus, etiquette defines good manners.
If an individual always performs certain acts in a certain way, then that is described as a mannerism - an individual characteristic.
In summary, Etiquette is the set of rules, Manners are the actions.
It is good manners to follow the proper etiquette for any situation.
Best Answer
These are both perfect constructions, which you may read about in stupefying (yet inadequate) detail here.
The perfect is constructed with a form of HAVE as an auxiliary verb followed by the past participle of the lexical verb. In these cases, the lexical verb is also HAVE, employed in the construction HAVE to ≈ must. The past participle of HAVE is had, so these constructions end with had to. In have had to ... the auxiliary is cast in the present-tense form, which is have with a first-person subject, so this is a present perfect. In had had to ... the auxiliary is cast in the past-tense form, which is always had, so this is a past perfect.
Examples of the use of these constructions:
When I say or write that sentence I mean that explaining the perfect construction many times is a component of my present history and experience.
That sentence means that explaining the perfect construction many times was a component of my history and experience at that time in the past.