I would dearly love it if the forms could be made to enter more than one record at a time. For instance I want to create several records, each relating to parts that are used to create a product. The parts already exist in a table, all I need to do is select them in a form. But having to submit the form for each entry is time-consuming and tedious. I’d like the opportunity to add rows/records (a little + sign after the field) in a form).
I’d like to see this feature too.
I am also looking for this feature.
i too am looking for this feature
Count me in on this bandwagon. Feels like a great feature that would get use immediately.
I have requested this as well. It should look like a small grid view that they can enter info in and then hit submit. We are a signage company and deal with clients that will submit more than 1200 individual orders for an event. When one department head has to enter in 50 signs at once, you can imagine the form just does not work so we don’t even use it. Great for surveys or one time use responses, but not a solution for requests that require more than like 5 entries.
I am new to Airtable and hopefully am adding this post to the right location. I, too, am looking for a way to add multiple records on one form rather than having to submit one form per record I want to add. Anyone know if this is possible or any creative workarounds? The real life scenario is that I want the form user to be able to look up an item [where items would already be listed in a column in the base and/or table] enter quantity [also a column] of that item in a separate field, then be able to repeat same functionality (aka lookup item & enter quantity) multiple times up to at least 20 items then submit form and you get 20 rows created all at once, for example.
I think I am looking for some thing similar. I want to create a customer quote that has multiple quantities of the same label priced.
It’s hard to see that, what I think of as of the exact right solution, has been implemented on the iOS mobile app for record entry (in multi-select fields) and exactly nowhere else.
Here is what the mobile entry looks like for a record with a multi-select field:
…and here is a form, in mobile view, performing the exact same record creation:
same in the browser…
Why use such different data entry methods when it’s clear the former is easily more robust than the later for multi-selection. And why not use this method for multiple linked record selection too.
The answer very likely comes down to code, I get it, so… I guess… I would expand this feature request to - make multi-selection more efficient and coherent across all multi-select field types.
It’s not just that it comes down to code, but that in one instance you are using Airtable’s proprietary software, within which Airtable built the entire UI, and has complete control over the way every bit of it is displayed to the user.
In the other instance, you are using the web in a browser. The browser has control over how UI elements display, and the kind of code Airtable can write to display the UI is constraint by what works in a browser and can be handled by web requests.
It’s no the kind of situation where they could just copy paste the code from their app UI display into their browser UI display. It’s not that easy by any means.
Yep. I can appreciate that. But also,
I’m mostly just an expert on my user experience and so I can only say with confidence that I would like to see a more coherent approach here. To wit. The multi-select interface, more broadly, affects the experience of form users (possible clients) and base collaborators (field agents) downstream. It’s also therefore tangental to the convenience / success of building complex (many-to-many) relationships in the field or at the client level. Potentially a very important factor, depending on the application.
I’m not expecting AT’s application engineers to stay up late cracking the browser code or inventing a new super-container to contain containers full of containers here - mostly just registering a user perspective. We’ll all soldier on I’m sure.