You would have seen that we use the term object quite a lot in our documentation here. This can be readily understood by those who do object oriented programming But architects usually have a different understanding of an object

For an architect; an object is something you can touch and feel and see. But in TAD that is not the case.

Objects can be just a 2D shape – this is in the very initial stages of designing. TAD is a loosely coupled system. It does NOT dictate how you should go about with your thinking. You are free to think which ever way you want – so often, you may just create a 2D shape without knowing whether you may want to use it; without sometimes even knowing if it is the contour of some built shape or not. But nevertheless, it is still an object

Then, as you flesh out that 2D shape – say you gave it a height and level (i.e. it becomes an extrusion) Even then it remains an object and that too the same object it was earlier.

In TAD, very crudely speaking, you would keep inserting objects and keep embellishing these objects as you become clearer and clearer in your thinking… Eventually your model would contain rich objects which serve the purpose of contributing to some part of your design

Some of these objects may be contours of spaces – some of them may even be contours of built-matter. So TAD handles both spaces as well as built matter