litphoria

So, every trait has a category. What goes into the category? The trait value/additional details/context. Think of it like this:

I am a rare albino spotted ocelot ∴

• SpeciesTrait
• Species Category of Feline
• Additional details of Rare albino spotted ocelot in category of feline

->

Rare albino ocelotis categorized by feline is categorized by species.

It is true though that would say that feline simply describes rare albino spotted ocelot for species.

As for changing it, I am not particularly married to any one set of terminology here, but I'm not sure that descriptor really fits what's going on, and would probably encourage them to be more specific than they are, which is not the point of them. All of the terms are pretty fluid in my mind; I still can't keep straight what to call additional details for traits, for example. But basically,

We have some bucket that represents one idea about a character. Like species.
We then have another bucket in the first which makes the entire thing searchable and comparable. Like feline.
We then have additional details/context/values which are not used for searching, but provide context and details for the entire thing. Like rare albino spotted ocelot.

None of these have set terms, but I'm pretty comfortable with using Trait for the first bucket.

I think I said something about this on my alt, but I still would really like the term type to replace category. Unless someone has a reason for why that doesn't make sense.

I am not confident in using descriptors for this and type even less. I will therefore require endorsements for me to be more comfortable doing this.

This has been sitting for a few months and hasn't been getting any love with endorsements (or even discussion) so I'm going to reject this.

I've had no movement on the items I've endorsed for well over a month, so I have had no free points to give anything else in all that time. And things like this are naturally going to be low priority for spending points on by the small percentage of us that do endorse. Sure, if someone cares, it will be re-suggested probably, but I'm also sure that a lot of things that I would endorse are currently not endorsed by me because they fall below the priorities of two or three things that are important to me.

Maybe "Trait Category" instead of "Category"? There is a tendency to click on "New Trait" if you want to suggest a new option for a trait. At least I did.

A trait category would still probably trigger the same mental cues you mentioned in another feedback: it's a category for traits, which is the thing a collection of traits go in, like sex and body and personality, right?

Right, but I have no better idea. I thought about "options" and similar. The problem is, if my eye-color is blue, my eye-color is a trait and that it is blue is a trait and also both are categories. I would tend to name eye-color as category and blue as trait since blue is an element of the category eye-color, but this wouldn't solve the problem. I thought about using two different words for trait, like feature and trait, but this would also cause confusion.

I'll think on it. I'll note this feedback was closed because it didn't receive endorsement, but as we can see from current scenarios, a lot of stuff doesn't get that unless it's urgently desirable or something.

I spoke with a friend who suggested 'option' as well. I think there's value in being straightforward and calling them trait options or trait choices.

There's confusion coming from the fact that from one way of looking at it, "sex" and "intelligence" and "charisma" are definitely traits one has. But from another perspective, they're not: "male" and "female", or "smart" or "dumb" or "genius", or "awkward" or "charming" are the traits instead, and the other three must be something else. So really both kinds of things make sense being called traits.

At least trait option makes things clearer, and we'll no longer confuse 'categories' for being the bigger thing and 'traits' for the smallest unit.

Trait stereotype would probably the most accurate to what they are, but trait option or choice could also work.

Trait stereotype is technically accurate but doesn't send the right signals for UX purposes, and a lot of people thinking stereotypes are inherently a bad thing makes me averse to using that in our terminology here.