First impressions and findings

[dolifer]

Hi there, now you’re thinking with portals, sorry, objects

Pros

• i like to be in control of my data
• love the idea that everything is an object
• sync across devices works like a charm
• easy enough is to link different instances or change object type “on the fly”.

Some findings after a few days of use

• no way to change a Created date, eg. while moving paper notes into digital format. As a workaround added a new MeetingDate relation for my Meeting Notes

• Sets are great, but free-form hierarchical structure would be a great option (like it’s done in History section).
  

  

• built-in templates and types are great, but now there is no way to replace / extend them, you can duplicate an existing, but there is no way to hide / disable standard one

• missing @me support, it’s weir to mention myself by fullname

• would be great to limit values for dropdown relations to a specific object type (like it’s done for tags)
  

  

Thank you for a great job for an alpha.
Looking forward for a new features and API.

[lynxlove]

Hey @dolifer Welcome to the community. Thank you for sharing your initial impression and thoughts about Anytype.

@dolifer

no way to change a Created date, eg. while moving paper notes into digital format. As a workaround added a new MeetingDate relation for my Meeting Notes

It would certainly be useful to change the creation date manually. There is a feature request available for it already, please do upvote ( ) it to show support

Allow "Creation Date" relation to be changeable

Hello! The Problem As one example — When new users are moving from other applications to Anytype, it is likely that they will be creating objects, to replicate the material from their previously used application (e.g. Google Docs). These can include notes, tasks, etc. At the moment, the “Creation Date” relation will always show the date on which the object was created; this cannot be changed. If a user created a Google Doc in 2019, but decided to move over to to Anytype, there is currently …

@dolifer

Sets are great, but free-form hierarchical structure would be a great option (like it’s done in History section).

There is a request for hierarchical view for sets as well. I guess, this along with Sets from relations would suit your need

Option to have rows in Sets be nested (and foldable) based on page hierarchy

I will use as an example History notes, but this would apply to any content type that requires (or could benefit from) nesting. Note this would require some sort of tree structure (where parents-children relations are explicit), which I don’t think we have. Say I have a page for “Conflict A”, and four pages linked to it for specific events within that conflict (for example, “Battle 1”, “Battle 2” and “Battle 3”). I’d like to be able to have a Set view in which the hierarchy between these entri…

@dolifer

built-in templates and types are great, but now there is no way to replace / extend them, you can duplicate an existing, but there is no way to hide / disable standard one

This one is for types and relations

Delete or Hide Predefined Types And Relations

Describe the solution you’d like It would provide a much better overview if the types and relations predefined by Anytype could be deleted or hidden. Describe alternatives you’ve considered None possible.

and this one is for templates

Change or delete default templates linked to default types

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. Default relations (propeties) and types created by the system cannot be edited nor deleted. This missing capability forces users to create duplicate relation and type whenever they want to cover a use case. Ex: Problem: Company (type) → I cannot add the relation (property) Country Solution (unsatisfactory): I created a new type Organization and I added the relation Country. Thus creating a duplicate There are already several fe…

@dolifer

missing @me support, it’s weir to mention myself by fullname

I’m not sure if a feature request exists for the same Please do search and create one if not already available

@dolifer

would be great to limit values for dropdown relations to a specific object type (like it’s done for tags)

You can already do that for custom relations created by you. For the one’s that are built-in, few might still be missing the type qualification

[dolifer]

@lynxlove

You can already do that for custom relations created by you. For the one’s that are built-in, few might still be missing the type qualification

Cool, though i’ve created a Company type, discovered that was built-in, now i have two

Upwoted the features you’ve mentioned, thank you for your time!