Epistemic coherence is a combination of the first five kinds of coherence, and ethics involves deliberative coherence as well. Explanatory coherence is a symmetric relation, unlike, say, conditional probability. That is, two propositions p and q cohere with each other equally. Similar hypotheses that explain similar pieces of evidence cohere. Propositions that describe the results of observations have a degree of acceptability on their own.
Contradictory propositions are incoherent with each other.
If P and Q both explain a proposition, and if P and Q are not explanatorily connected, then P and Q are incoherent with each other. The acceptability of a proposition in a system of propositions depends on its coherence with them. I will not elucidate these principles here, but merely note how they add content to the abstract specification of coherence as constraint satisfaction. Positive constraints involve propositions that cohere with each other, linking hypotheses with evidence and also tying together hypotheses that together explain some other proposition. In addition, there is a positive constraint encouraging but not demanding the acceptance of propositions describing the results of observation.