Prospective renaming of Collections & Sets; topic continuation

Talk
, ,
42

If you insist on formality, rather than usability, then each Space is a database, and Sets are queries in it. I get it.

Thing is, most people don’t. If Anytype wants to grow beyond users who tweak their kernels and compile their software then it needs to speak in terms that are understood intuitively, even without taking Computer Science 101.

Which is to say: start with the user, not the software. A good name is familiar, and intuitively understood. This is exactly the problem with “Set”, which is both novel and ambiguous.

Sticking with current terms, let’s imagine a hypothetical update that gives things a little twist. Everything else stays the same, except that whenever you create a new Type you automatically also create a new Set for it, and all of these Type Sets are contained in a set (named like your space name) which contains all sets. You don’t have to use it; you can even hid it, but you know that every object type has its set, and all sets are containted in the set of sets.

In this scenario Space is still formally the database and Sets are still queries and no function was limited. But wouldn’t you agree that with such an update Sets would feel for users a whole lot more like databases, de-facto indistinguishable?

43

Chinese leading IT companies all have a bad culture, they like to invent some strange terms to describe things, like some kind of jargon, to outsiders it seems quite confusing and puzzling.
In short, what I want to say is that for a software that is intended for everyone, there is nothing wrong with using simple terminology.

44

Like you said, software is intended to be for everyone. What I have seen are technical words. I will not call my personal space a personal database, nor will I call my collection, set, or list a compilator.

I feel that most of the people suggesting these words are programmers, so they may suit programmers more than any other industry. As a casual user, or in my case, an artist, I would prefer simple terminology.

And for people suggesting ‘Space’ to be ‘Database,’ in my opinion, it is just ridiculous. You would have multiple spaces, for example, a collaborative space for your company. So, I prefer not to use that term ‘Database’.

45

Agree.
I’ve shown (and explained a bit) a set and a collection around me (to non-tech profiles who work a bit with computers), asking “what’s in it for you”?
Very interesting, I’ll continue tonight!
Result so far :
Collection = folder (or once “storage”)
Set = search view (or once “I didn’t understand” :confused:)

For something that would do both, it’s not a given !

46

collector or listor is more confusing to me, it sounds like a person who collects / lists. just calling them lists is simpler

47

Yes (and no).
It can be a “person” or a “demon” or a robot or a machine which does the thing.

For me stands in the foreground that the combined Collection/Set active does somewhat.
It’s not simply a static result of any action, but it is the thing which does the action.
It’s an active tool.
Like a printer.

Let’s assume we will have later some AI instead of the Collection/Set.
You tell (or write) the AI to show you all Pages tagged as “hobby”.
And the AI generates a list as the result in the form as we know it from our Sets or Collections.

How would you call such an AI?
Would you really call it “List”? → I suppose no!
Wouldn’t be “Lister” a much better name? → I think so!

If you agree:
What is the difference between such an AI and a normal Collection/Set where we gave the instructions by configuring all the filters and other settings?
For me there is no substantial difference.
The Object does something after we have let it know, what we want from it.

No matter if we write instructions to an AI or if we click us through settings and filters.
In the end, the AI/person/demon/robot/machine does the job for us.

And the result what we get to see in the end will differ every day, because we always add new Pages, or delete some, or rename them and so on.
So the AI/person/demon/robot/machine must do the job to generate the resulted list again and again on it’s own.
It’s a “maker”, not a static Object.

The word “List” means something static.
The thing which makes the list can’t be named the same as the result of it’s work.
A “List” is a result of a work, not the doer of the work.

48

Such a topic!

It’s a part of our internal document, hope it somehow communicate our thinking.

Current problems:

Understanding

  1. Many users don’t understand difference between collections and sets
  2. There is no simple way to create a list and start adding objects to it

Creation

  1. The way to add existing objects into collections is not intuitive
  2. Sets queries are limited - you can’t show all objects related to an exact tag or date or any other object
  3. Here is no clear way for batch adding to a collection
  4. There is no fast and easy way to add relations to an object while creating it in-list
  5. There is no clear way for batch object select mode on mobile
  6. No templates are possible for collections and sets

Representation

  1. Filters are not easy to use
  2. Sorts are not easy to use
  3. There is no way in one click to switch layout (List, Gallery…)
  4. Working with relations (which relations to show or add) is also not easy. Many don’t understand how data view works because of this
  5. There is no grouping function in data view
  6. If I want to choose all objects in a collection I can’t if collection is big (hey pagination)

Inline sets

  1. Inline sets are not intuitive and often lead to disappointment (when you open it - it’s basically another object with different sorting and filtering)
  2. Inline sets on mobile don’t exist

Sounds like it’s a lot. Let’s prioritise and fix it! Many of these problems have the same roots. So

Proposal

Introduce a new type of layout and call it “list”. It will replace current “collection” and “set” (which are currently wrongly called object types).

List is more intuitive concept than a set or collection and everyone knows it. When you or me, or somebody else thinks of a list, it is clear for both of us what it means. Lists are ubiquitous. What to buy. What to watch. What to visit. Whom to meet. We are doing lists many times a week.

The idea to make it as simple as possible but keep it as powerful as possible.

All lists should be equal whether created by query or manually. It will simplify the idea. Not everyone needs collections, only few know what sets are, but everyone uses lists.

50

Give it up man, it sounds like you’re fighting a losing battle

51

Hey, @Code-Jack, your logic about List was extremely logical, and you provided valid scenarios about why it should not be "List ". However, unfortunately, your replacements for the word were not the best. No one disagrees with you about replacing the word - in fact, the topic was created because of you. There is still room for improvement if you can come up with a better word. But I feel like we’re getting close to a solution.

About the scenarios you gave us I know Anytype team can work around it.

52

I’m so glad to see that inline sets not having a mobile view is being acknowledged! I also see that you guys have discussed the inconvenience of having to create different view for the inline sets rather than have sets’ existing views sync with inline sets. As if I could get any more excited about this update :rofl:

It’s nice to see the reasoning behind the term ‘Lists.’ Truthfully, I can’t tell if my brain’s rejecting it simply because I’m too used to ‘collections’ and ‘sets’ or if it’s because the term itself, to me, is not ideal. At this point, I recommend hosting a poll and having the community vote for the term. Discussions are helpful, but I would love to see a post dedicated to getting the statistics of where we stand. From there, we can more specifically discuss the top two or three terms before hosting another poll and or/reaching a winner. Thoughts?

53

Hello! I would say we need to choose between lists and collections.

54

I’m on board with that. +1 for Collections!

55

Thanks for your kind word @GrayArc !
Seems you sense it how I feel.
I’m in deed on the edge to give up, simply in the name of peace and for not appearing stubborn.

Unfortunately I have not the impression.
There were too many comments from users for whom the name “List” is OK.
I wasn’t able to let them see the difference between a print and the thing which prints (a printer).

It seems there is a different thinking in countries with different languages.
German is precise. Everything must be clear, anything else is bad style.

English is more vague in meaning then German. “Spongier”.
But for native English speakers it’s somehow no problem. For a German, on the other hand, it’s like a sacrilege not to use precise terms.

But who am I to teach native English speakers something about their own language?
My English is too weak for that.
I can only try to point on the pin. That’s what I did, over and over. But as it seems, I can’t make other users see.

What I really not understand is that many here not even see the different problems with “List”.
Not only that the word is beside the point (and so, in my opinion, wrong!), but all my hints about the search and the foreseeable conflicts with other lists in Anytype (the List View and so on) didn’t help.

.

Maybe my last try to suggest something in this topic:

There is one more Name in my mind which pins to the point:

  • “Listbox”

The Collection/Set-Object is a “Listbox” and what it makes … are lists.

In my opinion a very good name!
The only disadvantage is, that a programmer will have a specific idea what a listbox is (not our new Object).

.

We could also name it so:
“Anybox”.
This is unique, I think.
On the second view it’s even logical, because the Object can show us any data.
(Off course in form of lists, and also in some other forms, like Kanban etc.)

Another idea:
“Wizbox”
Because the new Object will be like a wizards magic box from which he pulls all kind of stuff out.

Or maybe:
“Unibox”
Because it is a “universal” box from which we can get nearly everything. Whatever we want, we use (and look into) our trusted Unibox.

One box more:
“Victorybox”.
Think on a Swiss Victorinox knife. Whatever one wants to do, it can help, because it has sooo many features.

.

All these suggestions pinpoint again on the difference beween the thing which makes or contains something and the result (the list).
The box contains the list.
It gathers the data, it contains and shows us the data (as list), but the thing itself is not the list – it contains and shows us a list (of data).

It is a box.
A box with the special feature that it can also gather data on its own (as we know it from a Set).

The word “box” alone is not unique enough, so there must be a prefix to make it unique.
Listbox, Anybox, Wizbox, Unibox, Victorybox – whatever.

56

ok… I almost promised myself that I would not post on this topic, since its insane! but here we go.

Last year, a youtuber that I don’t follow much because its mainly for obsidian (and others), but that I do respect, because when I do watch it, he knows his stuff, reviewed anytype.

image
image863×879 102 KB

So, this is pretty much the “common terms” of the lexicon.
I see it myself as kinda like:

  • Relations → Properties
  • Sets → Queries
  • Collections → Folders (in linux terms, its correct, but not on windows terms)

In obsidian, Sets and Collections are “Dataview Queries”.

Btw … I have never seen the term “compilator”, “lister”, “collector” in programming world. We have compilers, collections (which are: lists, linked lists, arrays, vectors, hashmaps, hashsets, (sequences, maps and sets)).
Also makes no sense to have a “Typer” and an “Objector” and a “Widgeter” and a “Relationer”, an “Coverer” and a “Iconer”.

The fact remains that in Anytype, or ANY NOTES/PKM/WHATEVER tool, one have queries and folders/collections. One searches, the other stores/groups.
Trying to join in a query with a collection/folder/list/collector/compilator/lister/etc is bound to create more problems than solve them. This of course, meaning concept wise, in terms of code, queries and collections can share 90% of the code.

57

:slight_smile: Exactly this is the reason why I suggested them!
Because they are (more or less) unique.

Not completely unique in the world, but in our forum and in our beloved Anytype.
“List” on the other hand, is not unique. See in the Sets or Collections Layout settings. There is a “List” (View).

Or someone in the forum writes:
“I give you a list of examples why …”
→ A search in the forum for “list” would show this post in the results.
(In the list of results, by the way.)

58

@anton What’s the new term for List View going to be?

I don’t mind changing terminologies, but I think it should be a word that won’t be confused with another feature. I mean, I see nothing wrong with “List View”, but if List is going to be used as replacement for Sets/Collections, then I’m assuming List View will be renamed, as well. That’s got to be confusing for new users looking at old posts with List referring to Views.

Among the suggestions, I like Set and Compilation. It’s basic and doesn’t require context to understand.

I’m leaning towards keeping Sets because, at this point, it’s pretty much owned by Anytype in the pkm space.

59

+1 for Collection!

As I mentioned before, my team (which includes both techies and non-techies) recently moved to Slite and there was 0 friction for people to understand what a Collection is and how to use it.

“Collection” is:

  • extremely accessible to all users, even non-techies
  • clear and technically accurate (it collects objects)
  • not confusing with any other elements of Anytype

The only friction will be for existing users to internalize the change from the old/current collection (which requires linked objects) to the new/future collection (linked objects or queried/searched objects). But this isn’t a huge hurdle in my opinion, as it can be framed as “sets are being merged into collections”.

60

On the first glance, Collection is a good word.
I can support that.

I never liked “Set” because the word is too less unique.
But Collection is much better.

Only thing with it is this:
As it seems, the new combined Collection/Set will be much more mighty then our good old Collection.
It will get the Sets feature to gather Objects on its own, but there was also some other hints from the developers which make be believe that the new thing will get a bunch of mighty new features.

With this in mind, it should get a new name.
Nobody who searches in the forum because he has a problem wants to see thousands irrelevant search results, related to the old Collection.
(Yes, I know, one can filter for date, but who does it?)

A new and unique name would spare us this annoyance.

My personal new favorite is Listbox.
I think anyone has an intuitive understanding what it does – and the intuition fits.
It’s short, it even contains Anton’s beloved word “List” and it is unique in the forum (in contrast to “List” allone)

Also there is no urgent need to translate it. It works also in many other languages good enough.

I can see only one little downside for the later future:
A programmer knows that if he creates a graphical user interface, there are some standard elements, like radio buttons and so on. One of them is a “Listbox”.
Maybe Anytype will get in future the feature to design Templates for very complex formulars. They could contain things like radio buttons, menus … and … Listboxes (in terms of a GUI).
Then we’ll have a problem again, because it will no longer be unique.

“Anybox” would be a future safe and very unique term.
Unfortunately it is not as intuitive on the first glance, but I think this is not so important because everyone has to learn the software’s terms and because here is no overlapping with other meanings one learns it on the first day, in the very first minutes.
(Completely in contrast to “Set” and the difference to a Collection)

61

Hey I liked Listbox, but I want to say something

Don’t associate the new collection with the search results, as Anytype is still a beta product, and anything could evolve into something else based on the community’s feedback. For instance, if you search for an Anytype collection or whatever it be called, the most recent popular content will be displayed. Of course, this pertains to the new collection.

I don’t imagine myself searching in anytype collection tutorial in youtube and showing me ancient content of Anytype collections and sets in the near future.

62

Wow you all really have lots of views… Lots of energy and passions injected to this new feature :exploding_head: ~60 long posts within less than 1.5 days!!

Can you imagine how much we can achieve together if we can collaborate smoothly? :star_struck::muscle:

P.S. Any term will do for me but I like how you all play with words to get insights for the development/understanding of a function.