Skip to main content

Hi everyone

I've come up against a limitation and I'm wondering if there might be a creative workaround for it using linked records and/or multi-select options.

The problem is that when you have a base with multiple collaborators, if you have a "record comments" box in an interface, there's no way to limit which other users that collaborators can send @ comments to.  I'm building a platform that will involve multiple clients from different companies collaborating within the same base.  It's no issue restricting which records they can see based on filters by "current user" etc, but this option doesn't seem to be available for comments.  I think there may be a way to link users to records of other people just in the same company as them, and then use a multi-select option instead of the collaborators list you get when you type "@" to allow users just to select the names of colleagues, and then a checkbox or button that posts their comment.

Has anyone ever done this?  I feel sure there must be a way but I can't quite see it.

 

I don't think this is currently possible but definitely needed. Enterprise plans can use user groups to group @ mentions but not restrict which users/groups appear for certain users. I would probably create one base per client and then use syncing to create an overview backend base for myself. This way their data is separate (should they ever want access to it/integrate with their own systems via API) and you can turn over everything to them much easier. More work for you, but less risk to them.

I don't think this is currently possible but definitely needed. Enterprise plans can use user groups to group @ mentions but not restrict which users/groups appear for certain users. I would probably create one base per client and then use syncing to create an overview backend base for myself. This way their data is separate (should they ever want access to it/integrate with their own systems via API) and you can turn over everything to them much easier. More work for you, but less risk to them.


Thanks - this is what I thought.  I have the Enterprise package and this would be a great feature if they launched it.  Unfortunately using synced bases doesn't really provide what my client is looking for as they need a more user friendly front end option that doesn't require too much set up at the back end.  I'm going with Softr for my front end platform for this reason.  I really wish Airtable would just buy out Softr; they're perfect for each other!

Reply


Terms & Conditions