I agree, and it’s a workaround that only works in this specific case, a link to another file with exactly one attribute for the link. In Josh’s example it only ‘works’ because the semantics of the key ‘record’ is void, and the value of key ‘relationship’ is clearly a classifier for the link. The benefit for me is that in Obsidian, when FrontMatter is displayed as properties, the link is displayed as the relationship type, so you click on ‘father’ and it goes to the father. If you do anything more elaborate, you quickly end up being forced to source mode only.
And +1 on support for nested properties.
Nested properties are often the only (practical) solution to structure information in files such that it can be queried by dataview.
2 Likes
+1 from me.
— heads-up: this suggestion is about a beta version. should you want to try it, please consider making a sandbox vault or a backup of your data first —
I’m working on a new version for Metadata Menu Release 0.6.0-beta 6 · mdelobelle/metadatamenu · GitHub
It introduces the capability to manage « nested fields » with the new Object and ObjectList field types (more details about those new types here 0.6.0-beta.1 · mdelobelle/metadatamenu · Discussion #420 · GitHub)
And I’ve also introduced specific field controls in the property section for the fields that are « managed » by metadata menu (== that have a fileClass definition or that are pre-set in the plugin’s settings)
By combining the two features, one should be able to manage nested fields in the property section
If you don’t want to define all nested field(property), you can use the Yaml or JSON field type, and by clicking the control left to the field value in the property section, you will access a Yaml (or JSON) modal editor to modify your raw data like this example
9 Likes
+1 here also
+1 from me also
this is exactly my usecase and my issue 
With the metadata menu Object field, this would be a really nice addition for core property support.
5 Likes
My database brain is having a hard time with “nested”.
After properties came out, I went thru all my notes and found I had way too many nested tags and they conflicted and just established way too many stand alone hierarchies (silos). For example, #writing/craft and #writing/craft/character and #writing/craft/pov and search/semantic and search/contextual
I got rid of those because we have nesting by using combinations of yaml fields.
Now I have tags at the highest level (my assignment). Each note has at least one tag that expresses the major type of stuff in a note. #writing or search
The nesting is accomplished by assigning list objects. For example, in my case I call the object “pertaining” and it has craft, character, pov, semantic, or contextual.
This way I have flexibility and it is reflected and persisted in Search plugin queries saved as bookmarks.
For example, a search query tag:#writing [“pertaining”:craft]
I could be wrong, but I bet tags are indexed and the search plugin is optimized to find them first and then shreds the result set of notes for those notes that have list objects with values I’m searching for.
Color me leery of community plugins with their own objects.
What I’m waiting for is what we do with Links. Will they be objects just like notes, have properties, and be searchable. That would make for a multi dimensional utopia?
2 Likes
I think you are confusing nested / hierarchical tags (or their use cases) with nested YAML, which could be something like this:
children:
- name: Anna Smith
age: 12
- name: Jimmy Smith
age: 15
Or something more advanced like this for Quarto:
project:
output-dir: _output
toc: true
number-sections: true
bibliography: references.bib
format:
html:
css: styles.css
html-math-method: katex
pdf:
documentclass: report
margin-left: 30mm
margin-right: 30mm
This cannot be achieved the way you suggest, while remaining compatible with other YAML-based integrations.
3 Likes
+1 from me. Support for more developed note options is always great.
+1 for me!!!
+1 for me!!!
1 Like
+1 this would be amazing. Would enable me to group related metadata elements for my sanity.
1 Like
+1 for this
1 Like
+1 for me
1 Like
+1!!!
1 Like
+1
I have a YAML data structure as follows. I use dataview to peer into it no problem. I use scripts to generate it, so the editing in the properties field is simply aesthetic for me, but I wanted to gave a real-world example that would be nice to see well-displayed in properties.
tracking:
- {time: 8:23 AM, meditation: "Shamatha + Tibetan Dzogchen", duration: 30 mins, quality: 4, comments: “Less distracted than usual."}
- {time: 8:54 AM, awake: 8:17 AM}
- {time: 8:54 AM, sleep: 8.64 hours, comments: "Time asleep (if not avail, time in bed) from Apple Health", data: [{index: 1, value: In Bed, start: 10:02 PM, end: 8:44 AM, duration: 10.71 hours}, {index: 2, value: In Bed, start: 10:02 PM, end: 7:30 AM, duration: 9.46 hours}, {index: 3, value: Asleep, start: 10:25 PM, end: 12:51 AM, duration: 2.43 hours}, {index: 4, value: Asleep, start: 1:08 AM, end: 4:30 AM, duration: 3.36 hours}, {index: 5, value: Asleep, start: 4:47 AM, end: 5:55 AM, duration: 1.14 hours}, {index: 6, value: Asleep, start: 6:34 AM, end: 8:17 AM, duration: 1.71 hours}]}
- {time: 8:54 AM, drink: Water, with: "Plain", qty: 12 fl oz}
- {time: 8:54 AM, drink: Water, with: "Trace minerals", qty: 12 fl oz}
- {time: 9:07 AM, supplement: "Sedrup 5", brand: "Pure Land Farms", servings: 2, serving: pill}
- {time: 9:39 AM, supplement: "12 Systems Synergistic Multiple", brand: "Biokinetic Formulas", servings: 1, serving: tablet, vitA: 900 mcg, vitC: 90 mg, vitD3: 20 mcg, vitE: 20 mg, vitK: 40 mcg, vitB1: 5 mg, vitB2: 3 mg, niacin: 5 mg, vitB6: 5 mg, folic_acid: 208 mcg, vitB12: 40 mcg, biotin: 100 mcg, choline: 10 mg, vitB5: 10 mg, calcium: 50 mg, iodine: 50 mcg, magnesium: 25 mg, zinc: 3 mg, selenium: 35 mcg, copper: 1 mg, manganese: 1 mg, chromium: 75 mcg, molybdenum: 50 mcg, potassium: 1 mg}
(Hmmm… the rendering in this forum makes me think I ought to put the time data in quotes.)
5 Likes
+1 for me.
Recently started using Obsidian (and then Zotero). I cannot describe how wonderful these have been in my recently-begun studies. I want to marry them both, have their digital babies, and create a polygamous nerd-herd commune…
And I’d love nested yaml in properties in the meantime 
5 Likes
It would be very useful to be able to define, even from read view, property-value pair lists, so that, for example, links would be clickable.
And also to be able to define my own types, so that I could have all the fields ready to fill in
1 Like