Legacy Product Ideas

Hi Airtable.I’d like the ability to override the contents of formulae-text cells with text of my own. I most commonly use this for record titling/naming. We use Airtable as a meeting/diary manager. So if we put in the people who attend, the formulate title could be “Roger meets David”, but we could override that title to become “Financial Planning Meeting 3”, say.You can think of it as “overriding” or as “defaulting” but the point is that there are lots of time when i want formula-based default titles which can be changed to something else later.

It would be nice to be able to customize the content of tooltip in Interface charts by selecting another fields to be displayed in the tooltip.

What is the proposed idea/solution?In the Timeline view, I'd love to see a slightly more granular hourly view than "Day split into hours." Most of the records in my base are no more than an hour long, and there tend to be a few phases of the day where they bunch up a lot, which makes the "Day split into hours" zoom level really difficult to read. If there were something more zoomed in, even something as simple as "12 hours split into hours," that would help a lot. (The ability to freely zoom would be even better, but that might be too much to hope for!)When it comes to looking at shorter-duration events at a glance, the calendar view is easier to read, but Grouping is where the Timeline shines, and exactly what I need it for.

I find this feature invaluable in Excel, and I would love to see it implemented for Airtable.Currently the only conditional format coloring option just sticks a little colored box next to the main record name. For my team’s purposes, that’s not particularly useful.What would be awesome is if we could get individually colored cells - here’s a couple examplesif a cell contains the word “hello”, that cell is colored green in the backgroundif a cell contains a date that is within the next 2 days, that cell is colored red.I’d also love an option to shut off automatic coloring when something is grouped/sorted/filtered, as it’s distracting and not always necessary… but I guess that’s a product suggestion for a different post 🙂

What is the proposed idea/solution?The idea is to have a table within the database that stores information about the base's users and is accessible to use for filters in interfaces without having to have copious numbers of linked records across the base. For example, the table outlines the user, their manager, team, etc... then, in the interface, I can filter to check if the current user is in a certain team and show them records if they are....How does it solve the user problems?It removes the need to create a multitude of references across the base. I currently, for example, have a user and a team table, and each has multiple reference fields to outline how they relate to others, like their managers, their manager's managers, anyone who should have visibility over this person's records, etc... This would allow me to instead have the following filters:- if record owner is current user (currently possible)- if current user is

I'd love to be able to designate universal variables that could be referenced from any table in a base. So, for example, if I have a sales tax rate of 8%, I'd like to set that sales tax rate in one single place and then be able to reference that in formulas across the entire base. Currently, if I want to set up this type of variable, I need to 1) create a table of variables then 2) make sure every single record in the other tables is linked to the variables table 3) add a lookup field to every table that looks up this universal variable 4) create a formula which references this variable in the lookup field.For each universal variable, one should be able 1) give it a unique name that could be referenced in formulas across the entire table 2) set a data type (number, currency, percentage, etc)Then, if the sales tax rate changes, I just update the reference variable, and the changes propagate to all the formulas in the base that reference it.It's true that this cou

When a user comments on a record they are automatically notified of updates to that record. Although this can be switched off by ticking “not watching”, it seems repetitive and annoying as it is the norm for me and my team not to watch records.I appreciate that for most users, commenting and being automatically added to watching the record is correct. It would be good (as the base admin) to be able to switch off the auto-watching for all base users.

What is the proposed idea/solution?It would be great to have more options for notifications instead of just Email and Mobile on/off. Right now, we have to turn on the ability to be notified for all comments instead of just mentions for EACH record. It would be nice to have the option to turn all comment notifications on for ALL records!!How does is solve the user problems?It would help users not have to remember to turn it on, allowing them to not miss any important comments.

I have two issues that I am frustrated with that Google Forms does but Airtable public forms do not.One is the ability to close a form for submissions once it reaches a certain number of records, but leave the form context available for future -re-opening-, Usecase:  We have a common registration form for all of our events.  However the only thing that changes is what event the person is registering for.  Some of our events have a limited number of registration.  I would like to be able to turn the form 'off' when we reach that number of registrations.Right now I am literally having to make a master registration form, then make a copy for the event specific and monitor the count manually.  When it hits the count, remove all the contents from the form itself so nobody can enter.  However, that creates the next issue below.Currently there is no way to - close a form for submissions.  I propose like Google and other fo

Hi, I discovered Airtable just a few weeks ago and instantly fell in love with this application. It’s so cool! I am still new to it, but I’m learning so much. However, as a former Access user, I’m surprised it doesn’t feature almost any advanced rules for data input and validation in fields. I’m even more surprised that so very few people are asking for them. Data validation is important. For a solid database, it’s a core feature. Say I want to record a customer’s IBAN for money transfers. An IBAN always has exactly 27 characters; it’s not all right if someone by mistake inputs 25 or 28 characters or puts spaces into it. I need to set the IBAN field’s lenght to 27 characters and request that you fill out those 27 characters, not one less, not one more! Same goes for zip/postal codes, or tax codes. Validation rules are needed for such fields. A lot of stuff can get messed up if this kind of data is not recorded correctly, such as payments, shipments, fees. It’s a serious

There are tables that are used for quick data entry that are normally not updated very often (for example product brands). The linked table GUI allows to pick existing records from the brand table, or if you type new stuff and press enter a new record is created in the table. During massive and quick data entry this can be a problem as duplicate or incomplete records could be created. The idea is to have a “flag” at the table level that updates to that table can only be done from the actual table, and not from a linked record. It is a “data validation” feature really. Cheers,

I’ve just started using Airtable, and straightaway I’m wondering if it’s possible to replicate the data validation function available in Excel. Specifically, what I’d like to do is select from a Single Select list (the field would be called Category), and in the next column/field have a Subcategory, which would give me a Single Select list with a unique list based on the selection I made in the Category field. For example, if my Category selection was Utilities, my Subcategory selection list would include Phone, Electricity and Gas. Alternatively, if my Category selection was Travel, my Subcategory selection list would include Fuel, Public transport and Flights. Thanks.

I have very recently discovered Airtable and I have to say that I love it. For personal data and projects it would always be my first choice. TL;DR: views and forms IN the app like embedded views/forms, please I want to move some of my clients from Podio to Airtable, but I am too scared to do so. It is far too easy for ordinary users to delete data, break relationships, enter garbage, fail to enter required fields… In short, the data is TOO accessible to too many users. I’d love to expose data in a limited way via forms and views that limit accessibility and validate data entry. I had toyed with the idea of ONLY using embedded forms for data entry, but that seems like a terrible approach. This isn’t a very specific feature request, but I wish that, in addition to its awesome ‘back-end’, Airtable had a ‘front end’ layer that allowed me to control data entry, access and visibility, based on field-level, item-level

I would love it if Airtable had a formula to determine whether a string (or field reference containing a string) matched a given regular expression.Google Sheets, for example, has the REGEXMATCH() function. It takes a string/cell reference and a regex, and returns TRUE or FALSE based on whether a match is found.This would be immeasurably useful. A couple ideas:Validate email addresses, phone numbers, URLs, IP addresses, and other types of strictly formatted data.Enforce record naming conventions. (Field isn’t capitalized? Doesn’t start with a number? Contains spaces? Output a warning in another special formula field!)Build filters with very specific rules. E.g. match URLs where a subdomain contains the word “blue”. (include http://blue.example.com and

What is the proposed idea/solution?Right now when you search for a linked record, only exact results are returned. This means if I have a record titled "Texas State Fair - 2024 - Food", I cannot quickly grab that record by searching "Texas 2024" or "2024 food" because it's not exactly titled that way. I would have to type it all out, including hyphens, and if I had a lot of "Texas State Fair - 2024 - ###" records I'm going to have to look through them all every single time.How does is solve the user problems?Allowing a more relaxed search, semi-fuzzy of sorts, allows faster searching using the details a user remembers. It's very common to have the primary field of a table be a CONCAT formula to gather multiple pieces of data from a record (especially since you can only search for a linked record using that primary field and nothing else). By allowing less precise searches you can make it easier to find results, and there's nothing stopping

What is the proposed idea/solution?The best yet most annoying feature - is being able to create record straight from a linked columnDespite being a feature that sometimes are valuable this feature has created more trouble than anything else.To save tab space we often bunch different items under the same tab. We often use a combination of a locked filter that forces a category into a single select column and thereby split out what should be selectable in different linked columns around the base.This works really well until someone one day realises that they can just add new entries directly from a linked column, but not understanding that they need to issue the right category to the new entry on order to make everything calculate right. This is especially difficult to explain to new people that join our organisation and who has no prior understanding of Airtable and does not understand the underlying structure of how our bases are build.What would

The issueWe're working with list views that show a lot of numeric data for each record. When scrolling down, the header row moves up along with the records, so it immediately disappears from view and all numbers (which don't have any horizontal separator either) become a big blur of numbers.  What is the proposed idea/solution?It would be great if there would be options to:Enable a sticky headerShow a subtle vertical line to separate columnsColor or otherwise format columns How does is solve the user problems?I believe any of the above options would greatly help in keeping (large) list views readable.

I would like to be able to tell the top 5 selected items — I'm missing the ability to tell what row number an item is in/how many rows there are in a table.

Every time I try to scroll left using two fingers on one of my tables, it is triggering the touchpad’s back gesture in Chrome.

I have figured out the update record action on the automations, but the parameters it asks for is so incredibly vague and unclear, it should be corrected.  It should be something like:record to update:field to update:source record:source field:,It allows you to select a record or a field, when it needs a record??????.  I love your platform, but that form (and many like it) are vague to the point of being in the "what were they thinking?" category.ThanksJeff 

Some of my teams are going to be getting to the point of having 50+ bases soon. Please can we make folders and subfolders within a team so that I can get them organised?

On filter options, it would be useful if there was an option on the comparitor to be "in list" and "not in list". After either of these are selected, you can reference another record/view and a field to represent that list.As an example, lets say there is a table of "Teachers" and some of them have a "Teacher Type" field of "Art","History","Math", etc.  A view might be created to have a list of just Art Teachers ("Teacher Type" is "Art").  It would be nice if on another table that references Teachers that are interested in art projects, there could be a condition that says "Teacher" "is in list"  Table:Teachers; View "Art Teachers".And yes, I realize that this can probably be done by a mixture of linked tables and adding additional conditions within the view, but this methodology allows people to break down their views into simpler organizational blocks to be used in different places. If I have a need to get Art Teachers in 10 other views, I don't want t

What is your idea?Create a new role for users with interface-only access called Designer or something. These users could edit interface pages, show/hide fields, and even edit fields as necessary. They wouldn't be able to access the database or automations, or even add pages, but could modify existing pages as necessary.What Problem would it Solve?Users would be able to change values of some fields that they otherwise wouldn't be able to: single select, multiple select, etc. which can be helpful for users who accidentally create a value in these fields which are mispelled or have the wrong color etc.Users would be able to make minor cosmetic changes and move fields around as necessary. Less time would be taken from developers for making modest changes and fixing simple mistakesWho would benefit?I think this would give some users a sense of control over their app

What is the proposed idea/solution?When creating a grid, you have filter and sort. Add "limit rows returned".How does is solve the user problems?Lets say you have scheduled meetings, and you want to have a view that just lists the next meeting. You can filter to have scheduled date "after today", and sort it automatically so the next meeting is at the top. But there's no way to limit to the top row.  If you had a row limit with the options of ("Show All" (default), "First Row Only", or "Specific Limit" (with value), I can see this type of view being very handy when driving some automations.It would also be incredibly handy for people that want to schedule a price increase. Lets say I have 4 dates with 4 different prices, it would be possible to list the most current price by using a mixture of the max date that less than current, and showing the top row.How was this validated?Pretty basic. If you say only show 3 rows, only 3 rows

What is the proposed idea/solution?Extend controls for users with editor access to interfaces to be able to make columns wider and even move fields in the interface Grid view, just as it works in the database view.How does is solve the user problems?Right now, you can't make columns wider, which is even more restrictive than the list view of interfaces. I think having some additional controls over the grid view will make it appeal to certain users more familiar with spreadsheets and give them more of a sense of control.How was this validated?Users more familiar with Airtable have found some interfaces to be more restrictive than they prefer, even if they enjoy interfaces. Especially the grid view, which is so powerful in the base, is especially limiting in the interface.Who is the target audience?Users more familiar with spreadsheets. Users with some experience in Airtable. Commercial clients who want a bit more flexibility th