How do you decide if you use object type or relation of type?

Maybe most of you simply go for the object type or relation of type from your instinct, and so do I… Until that time I want to separate items in one type into more sub-types, I start to refine my system and find myself unsure which method to use. I see people using both approaches on the forum too.

Let say we have human type as the main type and I want to have something for actor, entrepreneur and colleague, friends. Is actor or colleague object type, or more like attribution thus relation?

The same applies to different types of resources, e.g. movie, animation; book, novel/fiction…

Reasons I have considered

  • Relations enables Multiple items (e.g. both actor and entrepreneur) ← but if we have multi-type then why not object?
  • Object enables ability to reference else where ← but if you use relation containing objects or tags, relation also do the same thing. Query is fine both ways.
  • Object type has template for quicker creation → but then why not multi-templates with different relation values for one object type with highest common factor instead of more object types? OR if we have embedded template, either way will do.

Perhaps object type is also a relation :thinking::exploding_head:?

Everything is object.
Object has relations.
Relation is object.
Object type is relation.
Then Object type and relation type are similar things
Maybe this will mess up lots of things…

P.S. My level of struggle is like set or collection :sweat_smile: Did I miss something? Or maybe I am just overthinking?!

1 Like

In your Human example, I use tags. The object type is my parent category while the relations are for subs aka the human types. Multi-types aren’t here yet and I prefer to be minimal. I guess it’s easier for me to accept a huge library of relations because my thinking is that it will grow no matter what, while types I can monitor to only create what’s necessary.

Another deciding factor is how I want it displayed in a set. That usually leads to going for relations.

I think your understanding of it makes sense, though not blatantly put into words in-app. I’ve literally used object type as a relation to classify animals (dog, cat, etc.) and it works but I’m troubled that I can’t rename it into something more appropriate like “animal type”. (I know a new relation can solve this, but that seems redundant. :laughing:)

1 Like

Since there are no sub-types or multi-type yet, the best way to categorize these right now is to use a relation (status or tag).

1 Like