Never have I faced such an illogical design decision in recent memory. I'm furious. I got an email saying that something was wrong with their interface and they couldn't view certain linked records, which is when I found this change. I can't even find the email where you guys talked about this.
I designed interfaces, and with some update they are all broken. Expanding a record takes you to some random view used from another element in the design, instead of the table's view that it is sourcing from that you're trying to expand (just like evvvvery where else in AT). Why the heck isn't it using the view from the source table in the element? I have to redesign all interfaces because of this, and each table that is attached to it. It's like starting from scratch, all over again. And, with multiple views, I have to hand design that for each one because they can't simply be duplicated.
And don't get me talking about the snapping and resizing behavior that is infuriating when I'm already mad I have to do this in the first place. Trying to simply move an element to the top of a column causes it to think you want to resize it, make a new column, or any other random behavior besides it going where you want it to go. It's always been like this.
What should have been a helpful addition (the ability to control each field's location, privacy, and how it is displayed) is now incredibly annoying and work intensive . Did you guys think about the implications of making these changes? It got me frustrated enough to come here to write this. That says something.
Ohhhhh now what the heck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can't have a dang different expanded view for records attached to the same table in a different view??!?!?!?!?!?!@?!@?!?!!?!??!
