Ability to have Sets without a Name relation (have other relation as primary one)

[qualquertipo]

Not all objects have names, so would be good to be able to have a Set in which the primary relation is something else.

For example, if I’m tracking runs, it makes sense to use the date as primary relation (and have no Name relation).

Related to this discussion:

Should Anytype allow Objects without a Name relation?

@thiago_nascimentodf Opa! Yeah, I’d be happy to have them be named “Untitled” (as long as I eventually can pick a different Relation to be shown on top as the title when opening the object - in my run example, I’d prefer the title to be the date; or even better, something like “Run for 2021/03/12”, where the date Relation is inline in the title). @lynxlove Does every Set need to have a primary Relation? In that case, either solution you mentioned is good. Allowing to pick a different Relation …

[TheLugal]

Throwing my support behind this one. It feels a little silly to be forced to either make up an arbitrary title, or have a completely empty field in the set.

[SedesGobhani]

I’m in. Seems a pointless waste of space to have a column for “Untitled”. Temporarily I’m going to name all my items “Open”.

[Shampra]

+1
For collection more than set.
Because if we just wan a datatable, the Name relation is mandatory and must be displayed, which poses a problem.
And a simple table doesn’t allow you to do much (especially the current version…).

In fact, we can try to hide this (set an icon as name for example), but this remains a useless field in some cases, which Anytype imposes.