Today I went into Builder to correct one field that I forgot to fill out. (I do this frequently enough, since I designed the app and sometimes it’s easier fixing things in the builder vs. the live app.) Usually I switch back to the classic builder but this time I said heck I may as well give the new one a try…
As you can see the field I’m correcting (dispatch notes) is in the JOB RECORD table/object, which contains 100+ fields. I update the dispatch notes field…all right the save button is in a new place now, okay…hit save…and now it’s telling me that 19 required fields aren’t completed? I have to enter ALL required fields in order to update a record in Builder?
I can explain why 19 required fields are empty by design if I really have to (i.e. different fields will display on forms in the live app depending on display rules…this automates the definition of customer types, job types, etc.) but surely there’s no way the next-gen app takes away the ability to update a single field??
I would have to create countless record rules that would insert “null” or something for every empty required field…and then update countless rules from “is empty” to “is null,” and who knows how many other downstream things would break from there…
First thing I did was confirm that there will not be a forced update to next-gen. “No forced transition” really means “no forced transition ever,” right? Unless this is a bug that will be fixed? Why the change in the first place? I built this app assuming that “required field” applies to front end users, not back end designers.
Yes, we do give the option to save without entering required fields when editing multiple records inline from the builder. This is what happens the first time you hit save:
@Kara - “Save with Errors” is a very disconcerting message. - they are not technically errors (in my mind) - they are just required fields. Perhaps the wording could be less alarming?
Ah yes - the old “hit-save-twice” trick - gets em every time. Less than 60 seconds in next-gen and I have learned my first “secret handshake!” (But why is there no badge for this?)
(I will poke fun a bit - because I never would have tried that - but in all seriousness thanks @Kara)
There is something to be said for the ability to make multiple edits (across multiple records) and save them all at once, but please accept my overall downvote anyway:
-Double-save secret handshake
-Fair points all around but @CarlHolmes I am with you on the wording, it is disconcerting, and confusing. I’m familiar with validation rules (i.e. ‘prevent saving and show the following message‘) but yeah I wouldn’t have made the connection between validation and required fields without @CSWinnall’s comment.
-Not errors in my mind either. Actually rude given how many ‘if x is blank’ rules I have running.
-Triple the number of clicks to edit a single field
Must be a more intuitive way to do this.
But I am not without gratitude. I’m a humble mechanic, and I won’t say how many hundreds of hours it took, but this app is the backbone of my business. All for making it better.
@Kara is there any specfic reason why we cant make fields required on forms instead of having globally required fields. In some cases it would be really nice to have both options.
So for example in the field settings to have the following options
Seconded.
I have a use case where a client wants to save a record as a draft without having to fill in all the required fields.
I have a slice of code to get around this that hides all the non-inputted required fields before the form submission check occurs.
Since we already allow you to override the “required” fields on the datatable, it might be simpler to have a new setting for the field on the form level, like this:
And it should be enabled by default by fields that are marked as required in the DataTable field settings.
@Kara this would be revolutionary if at a view-level as well as field-level!
Agreed that it should default inherit the preference from the field settings.
I think another layer to add to this could be conditional ‘required’ rules that could be set in the display rules. e.g. If status is ‘draft’, then category is ‘not required’. (or vice versa)
I hope that would cover most use cases? Keen to hear others’ thoughts.
yes a default setting for the required field in the field settings
A possibility to overrule on forms
And rules to make a field required / Unrequired also would just be a killer feature.
Today I sometime use display rules to hide a required a field to get around it, but it is not possible in all use cases
is a very disconcerting message. 
- they are not technically errors (in my mind) - they are just required fields. Perhaps the wording could be less alarming?
….probably just me 
)
