What is the proposed idea/solution? Enable a staging/pre-prod environment for bases, and their associated interfaces and data. The solution should allow each base to be logically linked to a pre-prod base, with two-way syncing that is fired manually. Changes made in pre-prod should be easily pushed to prod, which would include adding/removing/editing: fields & attributes (e.g. name, formula, links, etc.) tables & attributes interfaces data (to allow for data staging and cleaning, especially for ETL/ELT purposes) data syncs should be optional, and provide the option to either completely overwrite or merge with existing data How does is solve the user problems? This allows users to make changes to either base structures, logic, or interfaces without affecting live / production data and interfaces. How was this validated? Staging and Prod environments are best practice in any development process. Who is the target audience? Everyone who values data integrity. ... View more

What is the proposed idea/solution? As a user I want to be able to quickly share images, often screenshots, in the comments on a specific record. How does is solve the user problems? The user today needs to visit an external website to see the image I provide in an image link. Who is the target audience? Everyone who is collaborating in airtable ... View more

Following our discussion at Soon You'll Need a CDN - #15 by Ambroise_Dhenain Context With the upcoming change that will transform the currently public CDN into an internal CDN (where attachments can only be accessed from inside Airtable), Airtable customers are looking for a way to keep some attachments public. Proposal This could be gracefully handled with the ability to enable the “public CDN” option, for any “Attachment” field. Also, the ability to specify into which field to store the URL might be useful, the goal being able to know the public url of the attachment (one that doesn’t change!). Attachments configured this way would be properly stored into a public CDN, designated for that use case. The public CDN feature would have its own pricing and limits based on the customer’s plan. Motivations I’ve read that “Airtable doesn’t want to become a public CDN”, and that it shouldn’t be used for this purpose. I beg to differ slightly: Airtable doesn’t want to become a public CDN for free. The real issue at hand is for Airtable to store the attachments of all customers and support its cost. Also, there are real privacy-related issues about the current public CDN, because all attachments are automatically made public, which might not be GDPR-compliant, depending on what documents are made public this way. Aggravate by the fact there is no way to disable a public link ourselves to fix that manually. Airtable could imagine a few things: A free tier for public attachments, based on the customer’s plan (ex: 100 public attachments, 1000 public attachments for Pro, etc.) Something like “pay-as-you-go” where customers would pay additionally based on the number of public attachments stored, or size, or a mix of both (KISS, please) Make all attachments private by default (no public CDN, or more so “no long-lasting links”), while allowing us to enable public CDN (or so, “long-lasting links”) for the few fields where we really need it (and are ready to pay for it) Bring more options for Attachment fields where the public CDN has been enabled, such as: The ability to manually refresh the link (invalidate the old one, provide a new one) The ability to have “self-invalidating” links, that would expire after a set date (static or dynamic) It would make sense to propose such “public CDN” feature, which would be a good complement to the “internal CDN” that can only be accessed from within Airtable. Assuming it has its own pricing and managed differently, it would both provide great value, while forcing customers to only enable the public CDN for the few fields we need to have public. It wouldn’t be a hindrance to security, GDPR, or performances. I really hope such a system will be designed, better sooner than later, as it would help with the upcoming transition quite a lot. :crossed_fingers: ... View more

Hi airtable! I have a list (an array) of items in two columns. Each row represents two different lists (one in each column). I’d like to be able to compare the two columns and remove what is common in both. For example Row 1: Column 1: Apple, Orange, Pineapple, Kiwi Column 2: Apple, Kiwi Result: Column 3: Orange, Pineapple Row 2: Column 1: Banana, Orange, Grape, Kiwi, Pineapple, Passion Fruit Column 2: Orange, Grape, Pineapple Result: Column 3: Banana, Kiwi, Passion Fruit etc. The general functionality is to be able to compare (two or more arrays) and perform some kind of action. Is this something that could be worked on? Let me know if you’d like more details. There are a few other posts here from people who have similar requests and ideas: Removing specific values from arrays (this is mine in support) Array intersect formula Using Rollup to check on completed tasks? ... View more

Airtable interfaces have totally changed the way we are able to work with our data. Working in the actual bases is becoming more and more an admisitrative task, designing and creating the data architecture as well as all processes working in the background (scripts, automations, extensions). A new type of interface experience This calls for a completely new powerful approach to how interfaces are organised and accessed. We would like end users to sign into their Airtable account and see something like a landing page of our company (workspace). There they are shown the interfaces they can access (permissions). Interfaces from all bases in that workspace. This landing page should have design features, so I can create this experience. A new type of user level? This also could call for a completely new category of users. People who exclusively work with data through interfaces and no longer have any contact with the base in the background. This user level could be divided into two groups: People being able to work with data: create new records, edit data, etc. People only viewing data New pricing modell? With this a whole new pricing modell could be considered. This modell would differentiate between admins, programmers, base editors and end users of which there would probably be more than the former. ... View more

Hi there, We use airtable pro company wide with our 20 staff members. I’d really like to add them all as workspace collaborators to our main workspace so I can use the collaborator fields and send them emails etc when needed, but we have a few bases in the workspace with sensitive content that we cant share with the whole team, but we still need pro features on these bases. Therefore what would be AMAZING would be if airtable allowed workspace owners to password protect certain bases from other workspace users. This would improve my experience no end, at the moment I have to share 20 odd bases with each staff member individually as base collaborators and manually add / remove staff members for each base as people join/leave, plus the collaborator function doesn’t work so I have to also build staff members and email address as a separate tab in every base, which is clunky. Pretty please add this function if possible which would make the management of users in a workspace so much easier, and feels like it would not be a very difficult fix to implement? Thanks in advance! Helena ... View more

As we’ve been testing AirTable for our business’s project management needs, one thing we’ve had trouble setting up is something like an expense report, purchase order, or mileage report. Our typical reports would be a single printable document with several standard pieces of data (job name/number, purchase date, vendor info, billing method, etc), and a table containing purchase info (item, qty, price) with totals at the bottom. In Airtable, you can currently accomplish something like this with two tables (let’s call them “Expense Reports” and “Expense Items”) with the latter connected to the former with a “Link” field. But it’s a bit clumsy, because you’d have one table with each “report” and another table that contains lots and lots and lots of expense items that likely have nothing to do with each other. More importantly, it’s not really possible to export the data from each Report while including the Expense Item data. A more elegant solution would be a field type called “Nested Table.” This would create (within a record) a small table/spreadsheet with customizable columns, simple math functions, and the ability to add rows on-the-fly. Thoughts? ... View more

Please add a fit-to-width option for columns. Right now I have to manually shrink each column for short-data columns. Thank you! ... View more

This thread made me realize that we should probably have an option to PREVENT collaborators (particularly read-only collaborators) from being able to easily duplicate an entire base. When we share read-only links to bases or views, we have that option that we can uncheck that says: “Allow viewers to copy the data in this base” or “Allow viewers to copy data out of this view”. But it would be nice if we had that same feature for collaborators. ... View more