I have a random variable $T$ that takes values in $\{ \text{blue}, \text{green}, \text{red} \}$, and a number of observations of $T$:
|i |T |
|:--|:-----|
|1 |red |
|2 |red |
|3 |green |
|4 |red |
|5 |blue |
|6 |blue |
|7 |green |
|8 |red |
|9 |green |
or a matrix that looks like:
| i| T_blue| T_green| T_red|
|--:|------:|-------:|-----:|
| 1| 0| 0| 1|
| 2| 0| 0| 1|
| 3| 0| 1| 0|
| 4| 0| 0| 1|
| 5| 1| 0| 0|
| 6| 1| 0| 0|
| 7| 0| 1| 0|
| 8| 0| 0| 1|
| 9| 0| 1| 0|
What is the distance between any two rows of this matrix?
I know that, in general, the Jaccard index is recommended for binary data. Is this distance still meaningful when the columns are mutually exclusive across rows? That is, it reduces to an indicator for concordance: $\operatorname{Jaccard}(T_i,T_j) \in \{0, 1\}\ \forall\ i,j$. Is this nonstandard? Is there a better metric I should use?
Background
I would like to find the distance correlation between a categorical variable $T$ and a continuous variable $X$. As far as I can tell, this is conceptually valid because the distance correlation measures the deviation of $f(T,X)$ from $f(T)f(X)$, which has nothing to do with $T$ or $X$ themselves. Moreover, it is defined in terms of pairwise distances "within" variables, so it doesn't run into the messy issue of explicitly defining a distance between a categorical variable and a continuous one.
Do any special considerations arise for my use case?