How to setup database (medical student)

Hi all,
First of all, let me start by saying that I think the experience with Anytype has gone very smoothly from the beginning. The app seems wonderful, though I haven’t quite understand all it’s functionalities.

My biggest issue is in the ‘relationship’ between objects:

#1. I moved all my files coming from a mix of evernote/notion/onenote and I added a bunch of new files but I think I made a huge mistake there.
I am a medical student who would like to use anytype as a large database containing a selection of books+notes+articles (right now i have a SET of notes, SET of books and SET of articles)

I started to create new notes/books/articles from within the ‘SET’ database of notes/books/articles

I have created several tags to orden the entire system(for instance an object can have tag ‘speciality’: cardiology. followed by the ‘topic’ aortic valve)

what I really wanted to do is finally create a page (or database how you wanna call it) containing a mixture of books / articles / notes for each topic individually (this means the page ‘heart valve’ would contain all articles/books/notes that wear the tag/relation 'aortic valve).

How to configure?
I was under the assumption that if an object wears a certain tag/relation that these objects were connected but that’s certainly not the case. It seems there is no connection/relation between articles even though they wear identical tags (for instance same tag ‘speciality’ or same tag ‘topic’. (is confirmed by looking at my graph)

Is this due to the fact that I started new objects from within a SET?

How can I solve this?

  • should i create a page for each topic I want to discuss and then creat new links to each object? (seems really cumbersome as this creates a new non-alphabetical list)?
  • alternatively I tried playing around with filters within each SET: however this doesn’t solve my problem as you cannot refer to a filtered set of books/notes/articles?
  • can’t you just import/drawn part of the set/database within a page? (i prefer the database look)

#2: can you recover the get started section? accidentally largely deleted it (and bin was emptied)
#3: can you get a smaller font? (instead of zooming everything in and out?)
#4: if you want to link an object to a page > what is the difference between link (/link) versus mention (@)?
see also previous screenshot
seems that @ mention titles are automatically abbreviated whereas links are not? (strange…)
#5: small bug: mac title bar icon of anytype remains black at all times even when other icons are transparent

#6: mac app update button gives javascript error

many many thanks

1 Like

Hi @sdef, welcome to the forum!

I’m glad that your experience has been smooth, please remember that AnyType is still in Alpha so sometimes things break.

I’ll start by answering your first question, if I understood correctly, you want a big set with all your notes, books and articles with filtered views for specific topics.

If that is what you want, this is what you can currently do (as we wait for a planned feature which is multi-object sets):

  1. Create your objects types (in my case books and articles)
  2. Add a tag relation to your objects (in my case I created the topic relation)
  3. Create you objects and add topics to them

You should have something like this:


Now navigate to the relations page inside the library and create a new set for the “topic” relation. The set will display all your objects with the topic relation, if you want you can now create different views for each topic, and have something like this:

Hope this helps!

P.s. I wrote this fast so if you need any clarification please ask and I will update my answer.

2 Likes

About the other questions

I don’t think there is a way to get those back, check this:

If I understood correctly that is not possible yet, but it will soon, check:

The /link is a whole block while the mention can be used inside a text block. There are differences in how they are displayed and handled but to be honest I don’t have many more details. We hope to have better docs once the public version is released.

In general, for bugs and feature requests you should search the forum for topics related to your feedback, if you can’t find anything then go to the corresponding section and create a new topic following the template, you’d be helping a lot in making AnyType better. :wink:

I hope my replies helped you, if so please leave a like and if you need anything else feel free to contact me directly!

1 Like

As far as I know sets don’t support multiple type of objects. One solution would be (if you wanna have notes/books/articles in one set) to change them all to the same object type let’s say “document” and tag each one of them with notes/books/articles etc. That way you can display all in one set and also sort them via tag and relations, even making a separate view for each tag notes/books/articles. If the page heart valve should contain notes/books/articles you can simply link them via command or “assigned” tag.

1 Like

It’s not possible to add them back. For this you should request a new invite code so you can start over with a fresh account. Message support@anytype.io from the same email you signed up with and we’ll get you sorted out. :+1:

Dear Kerbless,
Dear community

Your answer (s) certainly helped a lot.
As you explained I was able to create a new set based on a ‘relation’.
In my case this relation was ‘topic= XXX’.

However:

  • Right now I have a set of books, a set of articles, a set of notes. All objects were tags like ‘topic’ and ‘subtopic’. After looking at your answer I created a new set for each topic individually. This ‘topic set’ thus contains a combination of books/articles/notes.

I would like to clean this up a little. Is it possible to sort this to ‘topic set’ First by ‘object type’ and then by name.
It seems I can only sort by name?

  • also, looking at the infograph: it still seems that my objects are totally not connected; in spite having the same ‘relation’. I would expect that all objects having an identical relation ‘such as in my case the same topic tag’ would be connected but they seem to stand on their own? I find this strange?

  • finally: i don’t seem able to change the width of the columns in the database/ set view?

thank you

2 Likes

This threw me at first as well but those relations are not considered links. They’re more for filtering of set views. There is work being done on relations as objects but I’m not sure what that will actually mean for us.
I personally use the Linked Project relation to force connections between objects and their set (by setting the set object as the related project). If this is done as a set filter then any objects added in that set will automatically have that linked project relation populated.

Are you using 0.29? That should have been fixed in that release

1 Like

Thanks a lot for your suggestion!

I met this problem recently and struggled to find a way to link objects through relations, especially for the objects and their sets.

I know where your coming from but if there is a set based around that relation, they should at the very least connect to that set. as it is right now, sets are just objects with no connection regardless of relations or types.

1 Like

I agree! But that’s also something that is already in place optionally as your set view is going to be defined by how you filter it and any filters that you apply to your set get applied to any objects you create from that set. That’s why I use the “Linked Project” relation so the set creates objects inherently linked back to the set that made them. I don’t think it should be a requirement though as I don’t want all my contacts linked to my phonebook set in the graph as those people are tied to projects rather than an arbitrary list in terms of the knowledge structure

I think more specifically I was talking about a visual link in the graph view. Currently nothing connects to sets of any type in graph view.

Unless you use the linked project relation which does link in graph view because you’re linking to an actual object with the relation

That’s what I do currently but I disagree with this. what about things that aren’t connected to a project? I have a set and relation called discoveries. should I make an empty project called discover? what about the projects these discoveries are linked to? why should I have to force the connection when the requirements for that connection are already there? they are discoveries that are collected into a set. it would make no sense to make a project page just for something that is a collection of information.

I disagree with the notion that I have to make a project page just to justify a connection.

The Linked Project relation doesn’t need a project specifically, just any object, so you can link to the set itself

that’s not the point.


I am not manually adding this set to every single item I make. that’s not a reasonable option. This set is the only binding factor between everything here, and I’m not creating a relation just to have an arrow appear. that shouldn’t be on me.

this is what that set (which has a lot of items in it) looks like on the graph view.


you telling me that I need to make a relation just to get that line to appear? i don’t think so.

AnyType isn’t hierarchical though so a set is not a database. It doesn’t contain data, it just views it. That’s why it’s so flexible because you can morph it however you want. I have 4-5 sets that view some of my objects but I wouldn’t want them to have an actual link back to each of the sets.

In this case as well, you have the game jam and spinner project in the same set so wouldn’t you want those discoveries to actually be linked to their respective projects instead of the set view? Otherwise they’d bring over the whole contents of the set to those projects which might otherwise be completely unrelated in terms of the knowledge.

Perhaps a method to get around it would be to have an option to “View set links” or something in the graph which would display a link between sets and the content they view. Maybe a toggle you could have on a set by set basis where you wanted to enforce a hierarchy.

1 Like