Editor: Properties Block with customisable options
What's the problem?
Imagine pages for wikis, team directories, documentation, filling out forms, movie hubs, etc. It's often not useful for properties to be at the top—especially in long documents. Instructions or context can be written about a certain property that makes more sense in the body content.
What's the solution?
Property as a block in the object's body.
- Edit property name
- Edit property value
- Edit property settings
- Edit property block display — inline (horizontal), stacked (vertical)
Shortcut commands for the property block
- /property — opens menu, option to create property
- /property name — /due date, /status, /description
Original submission by Simon:
One of the things I like most about Anytype (beside widgets :P) is the possibility to add properties from the /-menu anywhere in the object. I have several templates where one has to fill out the content and some properties distributed across the object content. This seems impossible in Anytwo atm, and this is my feature request for it.
7 Comments
Sign in to comment
Agree with that.
Ideally, we could even make it inline (and I would submit a request for that), but a block version that can be freely added provides flexibility that the current display lacks.
For example, I have an object type with a two-column layout: an image on the left and a few properties on the right.
Inline would be awesome, but the block propwert would be great stacked as well--right now in anytype I have a css workaround for stacked property blocks (shown below)
·7 days agoAn option to put the property name and value stacked vertically is a cool idea.
Yes, the vertical stacking is sometimes wanted. Good thing.
But why not finally make nails with heads?
Even 30 years ago there was database software or GUI intense software, that allowed full control over the appearance of Property fields.
Some examples:
1. The property name could appear in smaller or different font left below the value field (or above it, or on the left, or on the right).
2. The text orientation of the Property name, as well as for the value, are configurable: Left bound, centered, right bound, uplifted, lowered.
3. Font size and attributes like colour, as well as the background colour of the field, is configurable,
4. An additional text label could be added (to each side).
That makes sense for Properties that store the values of special units, the label would appear right from the value and display the unit.
Honestly: All that was real (if not even "standard" for advanced software) already 30 years ago, even on Atari computers.
(And also my own Windows software for supermarkets was able to do all that, more then 20 years ago, but I don't want to show of ...)
Anytype was always totally behind the time when it comes to such aspects of freedom.
AnyTwo should make it better!
In principle, simply look what a GUI designer software offers: it gives you all the mentioned features and freedoms to design your GUI as you want, with all these aspects.
And some software offers the same possibilities as GUI designer software.
I've seen it in multiple data base programs.
And yes also the behavior what should happen when the window becomes narrowed is configurable.
For example, if the Property field switch from side by side to stacked on each other.
And it makes sense, especially for business users.
They want to have small Property fields for brutto, netto, discount.
But a pregnant field with a bigger font and coloured background for the prize to pay.
I could give more examples for the "when & why" it makes sense to have such freedom.
And this from the point of view of a one-man company for over 20 years.
This is not the same as having Blocks with (their own) properties, isn't it?
I had a feature request for it here
and it got closed without further information.
No it’s not the same but maybe they already got a request like “Block as an Object“.
I wrote a comment in that post to explain the reasoning. Unfortunately our system still marks 'duplicates' as 'closed' on Quackback. We need to improve the integration.