Re: Functionality

Subject: Re: Functionality
From: Mike Mellody <mm000002 -at- PIXIE -dot- CO -dot- ZA>
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 17:51:25 +0200

On 24 May 96 at 11:43, Susan Self @ignite wrote:

> No one seems to have noticed the fact that products for software
> developers often contain many "functions" that can be called,
> such as runtime routines. A product with such functions as well as other
> features therefore has many capabilities. I think that the word
> "functionality" may have evolved to refer to this collection of
> functions and features.

Since this thread started, I've made the effort to check the way in
which functionality has been used. The context in 329 uses of the
word (mainly in computer science abstracts) indicates that
"functionality" is used in the sense of "the range or breadth of
functions that [something] has". In 40% of these
cases, the word was used in reference to additional or reduced

It is therefore a very useful word for which there appears to be no

I think we should always remember that a word is introduced to a
language because one person (usually) felt a need for it; it remains
in the language because many people find it useful. So it is with

Mike Mellody
100076 -dot- 3716 -at- dcompuserve -dot- com
mike -dot- mellody -at- pixie -dot- co -dot- za

Post Message: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Get Commands: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "help" in body.
Unsubscribe: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "signoff TECHWR-L"
Listowner: ejray -at- ionet -dot- net

Previous by Author: Re: Continued prepend/perpend discussion
Next by Author: on-line reviews
Previous by Thread: Re: Functionality
Next by Thread: Re: Functionality

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads