0

I use "multi-context-type device" to name the "device" that works in different modes for different types of context. For example, type of context is like "classroom", "office", and context is like "the classroom x by y at z hour yesterday".

I also use "multi-context-type object" to name "objects" that each is defined for one type of context.

The two cases are different, each usage above sounds uncomfortable to me. Is there a better way to say "multi-context-type" for these two cases?

Update: I think about using "multi-context-type device" for case 1 and "context-type-based objects" for case 2. Are they better? Is there more concise and principled way to express these meanings?

  • Why are you calling a device a multi-context device if it is associated with only 1 context? – Jim Jan 21 at 3:38
  • @Jim You are right, I was confused in the earlier question. I restated the question, with 2 different usages, I need to use both. – THN Jan 21 at 3:43
  • @Jim My current usages are probably wrong, please focus on the meaning I want to express instead. – THN Jan 21 at 4:04
1

In the first case, you're talking about something that's multipurpose:

[Merriam-Webster]

: serving or able to serve more than one purpose
// a multipurpose tool
// multipurpose rooms
// a multi-purpose cleaner

In different contexts (situations), the device serves a different purpose. It's a multipurpose device.


In the second case, in contrast, you're talking about a single-purpose object.

  • I want to emphasize "context type", because it is an important part in the mechanism/principle of these device and object. How to convey that? – THN Jan 21 at 9:21
  • An intuitive description is this "device" processes different "objects" differently based on the "context type" associating with each "object". – THN Jan 21 at 9:25
  • I've never heard of a device processing an object outside of things like, perhaps, blenders or juicers where they act on things that are introduced to them. It would help if you could be more specific in terms of the actual things you're talking about. – Jason Bassford Supports Monica Jan 21 at 10:22
  • Sorry for the abstraction, but the actual things are just some computer jargons. – THN Jan 21 at 16:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.