@Aleksi_Alkio @praveen hey guys, any update on this issue? Or should i just assume this process cant be done?
If they know the [Location] always, why don’t you fill States etc. automatically and they don’t need to search anything?
Thanks for the suggestion. After thinking about it, i concluded that
this will not work for me, for 3 main reasons.
-
some entries do not have a dedication [Location] tied to them, just the [Cities] and some of those entries would have the same [City] field. So that would be confusing and inconsistent.
-
It much easier for me to filter and run metrics on the entry results if the locations were separated by categories. I have formulas that will utilize the other fields for data allocation.
-
The primary reason: That creates less entries to choose from in the [Location] field. I have over 400 entries. I would much rather have the user select from 20 entries in the [Location] field, rather than 400 hundred.
I’m assuming that’s the primary purpose of dependent dropdown: to “narrow” the selections of a particular fields. If i were to use the method you described, i wouldn’t need to create multiple dropdowns in the first place.
Besides which, if the optional “filter” fields do work like how i want, then the user will have the option to search for all the entries in the [Location] field if he wishes. I just want to set up the filter functionality so the user has alternatives.
But i’m getting this sense that this is not possible. Can this be done, or should i just figure out another method? @Aleksi_Alkio
thanks for the swift response @Aleksi_Alkio @praveen Really appreciate it!
Praveen, i was actually there yesterday, spent about half a day on that site to be frank. I used the code example you both offered. There were no errors, but it didn’t produced my desired result, so I’ll do my best to clarify.
I attached a screenshot of my data sheet, named “Location Assets”. It’s broken up in 4 columns (“States” “Areas & Counties”, “Hoods & Cities” & “Location” )
My ideal objective is for a person to be able to a view of a filtered list
any of the fields without having to fill in the proceeding one.
So in other words, i want ALL the dependent dropdown fields to be available to someone to choose, i dont want them to disappear. However, i still want the lists that they choose from to be dynamically filtered based on their choices in the previous fields.
As an example from this sheet.
If someone were to select “Massachusetts” for the States, i would want for them to be able to select “Fort Point Channel” from a filtered list in the “Location” field, without the need to also select “South Boston” in the “Hoods and Cities” or “City of Boston skyline” in the “Areas & Counties” fields.
With my current Valid_If set up, a person cannot fill in the “Fort Point Channel” location without selecting
the “City of Boston skyline” in “Areas & Counties” & “South Boston” in the “Hoods & Cities” first. In fact the “Location” fields doesn’t even appear until the proceeding fields are entered. This is causing a lot of delay and frustration with data entry.
i would only want the succeeding fields to disappear (like it does with a Valid-If) if all the proceeding fields are blank, like how it is in rows 2-9.
Is there any further advice you can offer with how to setup the syntax here? It helps with a business need i have to solve, so i appreciate any insight you offer.
This was just an idea because the user could search the location typing the value with first few letters… and there it is. Is it okay if I take a copy of your app so I can play with it without messing your live app?
yes of course. I appreciate the suggestion.
And i agree regarding typing in the auto-fill functionality. That’s why this is ultimately not a deal-breaker for me. Just a convenience issue.
please, by all means go ahead and copy the app. If it cant be done, i’ll be fine with it. I can readjust.
Regards,
-Mic
So… are you saying this… You want to filter the location field one by one? I mean first the list of values is big and more you choose, smaller the list will be? Am I understood correctly?
@Aleksi_Alkio Exactly correct Translate
Now I believe I have understood your request… you would like to have kind of “reverse” dependent dropdown.
@Aleksi_Alkio to expand, i would like the user to have the ability to do that if they wish. I dont want them to always have to sequentially input data in the immediately proceeding field. Essentially, i just dont want the dependent drop downs to be hidden unless the list produces no options.
I’m encountering users with situations in that they know the location they want to select, but not the area of county the location is in. Which means they have to select a random “Area or County” (then “Hood of City”) hoping that is the one that will populate the desired location.
This situation makes the dependent drop more frustrating that just selecting from the entire list. I’m hoping for a solution to solve that problem.
for even more clarification, the Valid_If actually works perfectly fine, it filters the lists as i want them. The issue is that Valid Ifs hides all the fields until the current one is selected.
I dont know if that is because AppSheet is not applying the filter effect to the other fields, or if this is just a UX Design decision.
So i need two things from this situation
-
The dependent drop down fields to be visible at all times (show_if doesn’t seem to have any effect on dependent drop downs)
-
The filter effect of different valid_ifs to “stack” onto the same field.
(The Valid_Ifs only seems to work for the field immediately next to it)
Essentially just a way i can filter multiple fields at once to make the items in the selected fields smaller
hope that helps @Aleksi_Alkio
@Mic_L_Angelo, thanks for the clarification.
I think #1 is happening because the valid_if condition produces no results. If there is no valid result, the input itself is not shown because nothing valid can be put into it.
I don’t understand #2. There is nothing that limits Valid_ifs to the immediate next input. In fact, each of these is independently evaluated.
Could you perhaps
provide a screen capture to give us a better idea of what you’re seeing? Or you can give us the app name and steps to reproduce the problem.