Legacy Product Ideas

In the Last Modified Time formula you can watch for changes in selected fields.I wish I could also add a condition filter to only watch for changes in the selected field if there is a value match.I know I can do that via an additional separate field that will have a match-type function and then watch for changes of this field using the last-modified-time field… But it just ads unnecessary fields in Airtable. If Last Modified Time formula can do that, it eliminates need for the extra field.With number of fields in Airtable limited to 500 fields, saving every field counts.

On a computer I can select multiple records, press CMD-C go into a different table and press CMD-V to paste the selected records into that new table. Is there any way to copy and paste records from within the IOS app? Otherwise, are there any plans to allow ios users to be able to log into the Airtable website from a browser to view the Desktop version of airtable? Or give us a spreadsheet view from the ios app? I really enjoy the app, no question, but I have an ipad pro with a keyboard and its so painful sometimes to not have access to the spreadsheet and that extended functionality it comes with. Especially considering that my ipad technically speaking is the most power and modern computer out of all of my computers.

What is the proposed idea/solution?Provide a toggle (or perhaps 3 state field/toggle) at top of Expanded Record UI which will show/hide groups of fields:1) show/hide only editable fields2) show/hide only fields with valuesOthers have proposed ability to hide individual fields in Expanded Record view, but this can be done via hiding fields in views and Interfaces.  I'm proposing 2 common use cases that would improve usability and save a lot of additional work required for workarounds. How does is solve the user problems?As tables get longer (more fields), it gets cumbersome trying to edit or read data for one record.  Opening a record in Expanded Record view can be very long and frustrating when a) you just want to edit data, and/or b) have to scroll through lots of empty fields to find the data you want.  Yes, you can create new views and hide certain fields (e.g., for showing just editable fields), but a) the # of views can get unwieldy as bases grow, b) these

When you add a Checkbox field to a table, you can choose a style graphic used when the box is checked. You can choose from many graphics like a Check, an X, a Star, a Heart, etc.When you add a Function field to a table that returns numbers, you have the option to format the numbers. However, If the function returns a Boolean, the field will display a 1 or 0.  (I know you can add code to the function to display graphics, but that shouldn’t be necessary.)It would be nice to see a checkbox-style format for Boolean values returned from Function fields. Having the option would make the UI consistent when displaying Boolean values and performing calculations on these fields.

I want to make effective use of the Gantt chart, but it is difficult to use as it is now.It would be better to turn off the check for invalid dependencies in the Gantt chart and also turn off the movement linkage with the dependencies.Because when the dependency field is set, invalid dependencies occur because the Gantt chart assumes only sequential processing.In actual work, I think that most of the time it is parallel processing. (It would be easier if we could work with sequential processing...)When several hundred or more of these errors occur, the scrolling of the screen slows down considerably, and　various operations become stuck or failed.Even if it is parallel processing, I want to display the back and forth relationship of the records, so arrows are necessary.

There is a need to increase the Find Records limitation of 100 records that either come from a specified view or matched conditions. With up to 250K records per base in 2023, finding only 100 records is very limiting. Increasing the Find Records limit to match the Repeating Groups Automation limit of 8000 items per input list would make a dramatic improvement.

Proposed Idea/Solution: The proposed idea is to introduce a feature in Airtable that allows users to view PDF attachments side by side within the Airtable interface. This feature would enable users to compare and reference multiple PDF documents simultaneously, enhancing their workflow efficiency and productivity.How Does it Solve the User Problems: This solution addresses the user's need to work with multiple PDF documents simultaneously without having to switch between tabs or applications. By providing a side-by-side view of PDF attachments directly within Airtable, users can seamlessly compare and reference documents, leading to improved usability and productivity.How Was This Validated: This solution was proposed based on the user's expressed need for enhanced PDF attachment handling in Airtable, particularly the ability to view PDFs side by side. While Airtable currently doesn't offer this feature, the proposal aligns with the user's workflow requirements and feedback.Who is the

Would like to be able to view and update Airtable information from within MS Teams. Monday.com and Wrike already have apps. Unsure what it would take, but just a suggestion. 

Hi,I can’t see any integration with Microsoft Teams ? Did I miss something ?It seems so naturall to do that.

What is the proposed idea/solution?I would like linked records to be synced between tables in both directions. For example, I have one base that contains campaigns and another one that contains products. Products are linked to campaigns in the products base and while I can also link them in the synced product table in the campaigns base, I cannot make edits in the campaigns base on them.How does is solve the user problems?Allow edits on linked records between two-way synced tables.How was this validated?It's a big use case within our company to facilitate collaboration and increase workspeed while maintaining proper rights distribution.Who is the target audience?Everyone working with synced tables.

Hey team!We created an interface for our orders, and have one page that is "view only" and another that is editable.  I placed an "Edit" button at the top of the view-only interface that opens the editable one.  However, it doesn't stay on the current record ID when doing so, and instead goes back to the record at the top of the list. It would be nice if on this menu, there was an option to "Stay on current record" for buttons.This would enable us to more smoothly go through our workflow when processing orders, and I'm sure others would find other uses for it as well. 

Current, if we have base read-only collaborators, the only way to view this list would be on the individual base. There is not a way to view an entire list of all read-only collaborators within the workspace. The workspace list will only show you the billable collaborators. However if you have lots of bases (what Airtable would want presumably) there is no way to view a report of who can view your bases. This is a potential security issue. For example, we had an employee leave, but they remained a read-only collaborator. Since we have no easy way to review all our bases, they remained on a base that was missed. It’s an administrative burden to go search each base. Please add some kind of additional reporting on this.

In the Data pane, if I have a Single Select or Multi Select field that I'd like to change to Single Line of Text, I have to wait until my browser loads all the options in the field (sometimes thousands). Having a way to change the data type of the field without going into the field would be very helpful and save process time in editing tables.

Airtable is changing the face of software applications by separating data from form.The Gantt, Timeline, Calendar and Kanban views are awesome. Why have special apps for these functions when your data underneath can be visualised as needed!My product suggestion is that a Network and Tree View be added.ORORTechnically these are all Directed Acyclic Graphs and there are myriads of use cases where business data forms either a hierarchy or a flow graph.Organisation ChartsBill of MaterialsWork Breakdown StructureProduct classification systemsTask networks (which complement the Gantt View)etc etc.Anyone else see value in a data driven view like this?David

Quite surprised to discover today that Airtable doesn’t offer basic image editing tools such as rotate or crop. We took a bunch of photos on an iPhone directly into Airtable iOS and the perspective is sideways with no option to correct. Only solution at the moment according to the below Airtable support article is to download the file, correct, and then reupload which is a hassle.Can I edit images in Airtable?

id like to remove the grey background and airtable branding from the emails sent via Airtable Automationsid like to be able to send emails that look like more like a plain text email

I’d like to be able to specify a value to start the autonumber, and even the interval. Of course, I can start at any number I want, as long as I create and then delete as many rows as needed :slightly_smiling_face: but a better solution would be welcome!!

What is the proposed idea/solution?Currently, there is significant differences in features across the different interface 'types'.  Even among the 'elements' there are differences.  For example, you can have a 'list' type (which has 'sort'), but if you add a 'list' element to another type (e.g. Dashboard), you don't get same capabilities (e.g. 'sorting', 'hierarchy').  It's as if all the 'types' are developed separately, and new features are not retroactively added to 'old' types.  How does is solve the user problems?These inconsistencies in look and features are frustrating to builders who would expect that features are similar across elements.  

What is the proposed idea/solution?Allow for 'sort' feature in interface types beyond just the full 'List' type.  Lists are available to add in 'Dashboard' type and when added to 'blank' but no sort function is available.  It would be really nice to also allow users to select columns to show/hide in lists.  How does is solve the user problems?Adds much more customization to each user and their different work styles.  Also makes 'lists' more consistent across interface types.  

I use grouped records quite a bit but I find the default display format quite distracting and difficult to read because of the field names and the extra space they create, especially when using subgroups. They aren't really necessary because the values indicate what the columns represent.I'm hoping you will give us the option of displaying the field names or not, for each group and subgroup.  Example attached.Thanks for your consideration!

Hi there! would be nice to have an option to enter the current date as a default in a date field, that would save some taps on mobile devices for data entry.

We use the page designer block to create reports on customers and projects and love this functionality.However the usability of the block is severely limited by the fixed field size of each element. It would be great if field size would by dynamic to match the content of the underlying report (e.g. tables to be sized to show the number of related records, free text fields to be sized to fit the text) so that we can be confident that ALL data is displayed.

Hi there,Please could you add to the list of record names in the “What should each record be called?” list in the Rename Table dialog box:TourManifestTransferCallNoteRateZoneVehicleReservationWould be most useful if possible, thank you.EDIT: Turns out there is a form you can use to request more terms.Here is the link https://airtable.com/shrYDFCz16VkoAqKv

What is the proposed idea/solution?It's REALLY ANNOYING having to duplicate automation to account for both scenarios.How does is solve the user problems?It's REALLY ANNOYING having to duplicate automation to account for both scenarios.How was this validated?It's REALLY ANNOYING having to duplicate automation to account for both scenarios.Who is the target audience?It's REALLY ANNOYING having to duplicate automation to account for both scenarios.

Currently, there is a way to search within a table, but no way to search through an entire base.