Feedback for “Schemas and Types”; Why is a "Query" considered a "type"?

It is more of a fundamental question in terms of naming some artifacts of a GraphQl system.

Why is a "Query" considered a "type"? It is hard for me to conceptualize the following two declarations in the same specification because their essential nature and semantics are different:

type Character {
name: String!
appearsIn: [Episode!]!
}

type Query {
droid(id: ID!): Droid
}

Character describes the type (composition) of a data object whereas Query is an operation. Conceptually, Query, Mutation, and Subscription are "operations" - not "types".

Why are we overloading the term "type" to specify the "composition of a data object" as well as an "operation"?

Saying the following may be more appropriate if we have to use the term "type":

objectType Character {
name: String!
appearsIn: [Episode!]!
}

operationType Query {
droid(id: ID!): Droid
}

Maybe you can explain it in a way that avoids this conceptual confusion between the "composition of a data object" and an "operation" indicated by the same term "type".

まず「Schemas and Types」のドキュメントと、Query、Mutation、Subscription、object types を扱う GraphQL 仕様のセクションを確認してください。これらの概念がなぜ「type」という用語を共有しているのかを明確に説明できるか、混乱を解消する具体的なドキュメント変更を決定できれば完了です。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。