 | Anthony Carter 6/8/2007 5:38:15 PM This would be a great idea as an option. It provides a cleaner and more user friendly view.
Also, it would be good idea to add the option of multiple tabbed views under one another for more flexibilty
|
 | Kevin Smith 6/11/2009 4:31:30 PM I'd love to see the ability to collapse related views that are inside a viewed details form. For example, if I have a form for "Projects" and it has sections for related tasks, resources, issues, expenses, etc - the form gets very busy. I'd like to see the ability to expand/collapse these sections via default or formulas just like you did with sections within the main form.
|
 | José de Alencar Pereira Neto 6/12/2009 3:42:48 AM For sure it will be very usefull
|
 | Kirill Bondar 6/12/2009 7:46:37 AM |
| Kevin Smith 6/12/2009 3:42:44 PM Kirill -
Your "tabbed" idea is exactly what I was looking for. Any idea when/if this will get implemented?
|
 | Philipp Matuschka (MMB) 10/21/2010 3:07:17 AM Would it be possible to include an option to present selections as sub tabs rather than as the full list as displayed at the moment. For example, when a user selects a Person in my application, there are 12 selections below the person record, all with good reason. Where there are many records in the selections, my users are finding a) that the screen takes quite long to build, and then b) that it takes a lot of scrolling to find the actual data they are looking for.
A second possible way to solve this would by by using expand/collapse technology similar to what is used in the forms.
|
 | basenine 10/21/2010 5:32:19 PM Try switching browsers to Firefox - they have a setting for "Search as you type" (no need to control F - just start typing and the page jumps to the matching word - if there is more than 1 word the same, you can control G and skip to the next matching word). We've found this will solve your second problem http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/firefox/Cheers - Brett |
| Philipp Matuschka (MMB) 10/22/2010 4:06:03 AM I'm sure that works just fine, but in fairness there a number of different browsers and I don't think "forcing" a switch to any one of them is an acceptable solution. If it is possible to bring up the tabs in different colours for the users, it can't be a huge challenge to do the same for SetUp mode.
Thanks
|
 | Ton Jense 3/14/2012 4:11:10 AM Some tables have many relationships to other tables. And though that is not really a problem in teamdesk, it leads to a very long page with many subsequent "sections" that hold the data for all the related tables.
I think it would be better to organize those views in one tabbed interface, in which each view is presented on a different tab.
|
 | Slava Shinderov 3/14/2012 4:24:00 AM Merged with:
497 - Presentation of data from related tables
|
| Slava Shinderov 3/14/2012 4:36:47 AM Merged with:
281 - Collapse Sections (related table views)
|
 | Scott Miller 3/14/2012 9:01:08 AM This would certainly make things more manageable and user friendly.
|
 | gerardo garcia 3/14/2012 9:07:37 AM Give us hope, is this coming?
|
| Scott Miller 8/28/2012 7:08:02 AM Hi Guys is this being considered as it would really help with the screen layout?
|
| Ton Jense 8/28/2012 7:25:12 AM This Idea started back in late 2006....
For some reason it still isn't there yet.....
Teamdes is a great product. Why not make it even better?
Or is this too difficult to implement ???
|
| Kirill Bondar 8/28/2012 8:27:25 AM Ideally we should render only the active detail tab when form opens, other tabs data should be loaded on demand via AJAX calls when tab is clicked; but our code is not ready for AJAX yet.
Loading everything when form opens and rendering it as tabs is possible but will affect the height of the form only, it won't speed up page loading time.
|
| Ton Jense 8/28/2012 8:47:43 AM The AJAX option to load on demand would improve the solution.
It's not only about the height of the screen. It's about the first impression for the user on what he/she sees.... Even without AJAX, I think a tabbed interface will look so much better than what we have now...
|
| Scott Miller 2/5/2013 8:36:16 AM Any news on this? Aesthetically this would be a major plus point and would help to minimise content overload.
|
| basenine 5/20/2013 12:07:15 AM @ Kiril,
I just read your above post and in regards to Speed of Page Loading, if it doesn't make it go any slower, the aesthetics of this Idea are certainly a welcome change.
I've noticed a few of my customers straining to see what they're supposed to be focussing on because the page can be, in some instances, overwhelming. With Slava's suggestion here, I think people will understand more clearly the Form/Record they're viewing.
|
| Scott Miller 5/20/2013 10:51:07 AM @Kirill reading between the lines is this waiting on the code being AJAX ready? If so, is there a timescale?
|
| Kirill Bondar 5/21/2013 9:11:02 AM REST/AJAX API is on the way
|
| basenine 5/21/2013 5:44:42 PM Woohoo
|
 | Rick Cogley 5/23/2013 3:03:51 AM This will be a nice improvement. Cool!
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/19/2013 7:03:35 AM
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/19/2013 7:04:24 AM Merged with:
377 - Sub Tabs / Selections
|
| basenine 11/19/2013 2:23:47 PM I was only looking at this yesterday! Cool
|
| Slava Shinderov 11/20/2013 9:54:01 AM We've added ability to display related detail views using tabs.
If you wish to test how it works, please enable "New Record Preview Layout" in Labs.
There would be no difference if there is none or just one detail view.
|
| Rick Cogley 11/20/2013 9:58:32 AM Alright!
|
| Scott Miller 11/20/2013 2:09:10 PM Really cool. One minor observation, when you click the tab the screen tracks back up which has you automatically scrolling down each time.
|
| basenine 11/20/2013 2:09:34 PM Yep - fantastic! Works really well. Cheers
|
| basenine 11/20/2013 2:36:08 PM I agree with Scott. Only minor but it would be better if it didn't shoot back to the top of the page. Also, could we maybe choose which tables enable this feature rather than having it global?
|
| basenine 11/20/2013 7:51:00 PM <<"Also, could we maybe choose which tables enable this feature rather than having it global?">>
Forget that comment...all good the way it is.
In regards to the tracking issue - it would be good when the tab is pressed if the result showed all the records in that list i.e. scroll up to show all available records - obviously maxing out if there are too many for the browser screen.
|
| basenine 11/20/2013 11:36:23 PM I'm having some refresh issues:
1st one was removing a File from a File Attachment column ---> it remained in the table view even after refresh and exiting the parent record.
2nd one was doing a buttoned workflow rule that updated a field. The record updated as expected, but again, the Table view shows the old value.
|
| basenine 11/20/2013 11:39:16 PM Both times...after a period of time...both refreshed as expected
|
| José de Alencar Pereira Neto 11/21/2013 5:43:20 AM I found a little problem. I can´t click to re-sort (ascending or descencing) a given column. It ever keeps the status quo ante
|
| gerardo garcia 11/21/2013 10:39:50 AM I´ve noticed the new display of the tabs today. Works great also in android phones. This is beatiful Teamdesk. Thanks.
|
| basenine 11/21/2013 9:20:23 PM Hiding the Tabs with no data would be nice too.
Rather than a solid block of colour, would a Stroke Outline (Around the Tab) in the colour be ok?
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/22/2013 4:48:15 AM @scott: we've updated the code to eliminate unnecessary jumps.
@basenine, @alencar: we've noticed some problems with caching that may cause view do not reflect modifications in settings and data, it was fixed yesterday. please review if the problem is still persist.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/22/2013 4:51:12 AM @basenine:
1. it is impossible to hide empty results since we do not query the tab until it is active. even if we will, it will be then impossible to add new detail record to an empty list.
2. the idea was to make detail tab bar visually distinct from main tab bar. we've tried several variants including outlining and so far ended up with the style we have for now.
|
| basenine 11/22/2013 6:51:58 PM Thanks Kirill. I've noticed you've removed the rounded corners too - Steve will not be happy 😀 - although at least there won't be a law suit!
Makes sense on both counts for hiding tabs - especially the second one! That was an "Oh yeah" moment, right there...😉
Cheers
|
 | Robert Gustavsson 11/24/2013 7:46:01 AM Why not make every subview an implicit collapsible/expandable section instead, as Kevin suggested in 2009?
|
| Rick Cogley 11/25/2013 12:32:55 AM Just an observation, but having the [More] button relegates some of the related-data tabs to a subordinate status. There are obvious benefits to having fast, ready access to all tabs in the original format style (thinking order entry), but the compactness of this beta design is quite nice. I am not sure that hiding rows 2 + is worth the extra few px saved, though, trading off for the inconvenience of having to click More to get at them...
|
 | martin oliver 11/25/2013 10:33:29 AM We have some simple related tables which give the operator a view of some critical information, which is used while editing a record. Although not a train smash, they now have to open the tab to view this info. If possible, it would be handy to be able to toggle this option.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/25/2013 10:39:06 AM @martin: You can disable tab rendering by disabling "New Record Preview Layout" in Labs.
|
| Philipp Matuschka (MMB) 11/25/2013 10:39:31 AM This is fantastic functionality. Can I join Rick's comment about the [More] button. Multiple rows of Tabs like used on the primary tabs would in my opinion be better.
|
| martin oliver 11/25/2013 12:15:59 PM @Kirill: I think for the most part this new layout is excellent. Was rather suggesting to be able to toggle per relation.
|
| Slava Shinderov 11/25/2013 12:57:09 PM @Martin we've no plans to make new layout available per relation.
I'd recommend you to reorder detail tables so that table of interest is displayed first - first tab is always loaded together with main record form.
|
| Rick Cogley 11/25/2013 5:10:48 PM Hi Slava, Kirill, what about offering this as an option per table tab, in the table setup?
|
| basenine 11/25/2013 5:16:30 PM That's what I suggested previously (above) then retracted the idea...Maybe there is some use for it after all. Although to a user, it might get confusing.
|
 | Liquid Rapid 11/25/2013 5:23:51 PM I would also like it as a per-table option. Different types of data would work better with one or the other format.
For Customers, that may have many different types of related data, I would want to make it tabbed.
For scheduled Visits, that have a few types of related data, I would want them all visible at once. The interface for this kind of depends on being able to see everything at a glance.
|
| Rick Cogley 11/25/2013 5:27:48 PM Yes, I think it depends on a couple of things - the need for entry speed, and visibility of all data at once, being two. The main interface used also has an impact. The choice will be different if most users are on laptops with smallish screens, as opposed to office workers with desktops with a lot of "screen real estate".
|
| basenine 11/25/2013 5:33:02 PM I just had a request to turn it off from one of my customers for the reason Nathan mentions.
It's a shame because we all wanted this feature so badly and it really does make a huge difference to presentation.
Rather than a per table setup option, could we toggle at User Interface level? Therefore we could set and forget and the user can alter as required.
|
| basenine 11/25/2013 5:34:37 PM @Slava, Kirill et al....pulling hair out! 😉 lol
|
| basenine 11/25/2013 9:23:41 PM Having another Refresh problem.
I'm trying to adjust/set a Date field in a Record (Using InLine Editing) and it's not letting me use the Default Date link (to the far right of the field).
It will let me use the date picker from the calendar button or I can manually type the date in, but upon Saving, it wipes it to "null".
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/28/2013 5:28:30 AM @basenine: we've fixed today link. as for picking the date via calendar or typing manually, we are unable to repro - could you please review and if the problem persist post a link to your app via support desk?
|
| basenine 11/28/2013 5:40:19 AM Hi Kirill
I noticed that the today link worked today... So did the Calendar pick and manual type in, so I thought you must have fixed it. I'll keep an eye out for it tomorrow
Cheers 😀
|
| basenine 11/28/2013 4:36:18 PM I notice above (@Kevin - 2nd comment from top) that there's reference to Collapsable views... Here's another idea from 2008 that I overlooked at the time, but I found this morning whilst performing a Search Collapse / Expand Views within an Overview |
| Robert Gustavsson 11/29/2013 4:49:57 AM The sub-views seem to be downloaded one at a time. Is this how you intend to do in the future too? The interface is a little slower now than before.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/29/2013 5:07:45 AM @Robert - before the change we were returning the page in full; to get first results you had to wait until master record and all the detail views are queried.
Now we render master record and postpone loading detail views while they are off-screen. Though visually it may look it works slower than before because of "Loading" message, with this change you get master record on screen much faster, moreover since we are loading each detail view separately we are caching them separately as well - the chances to hit the cache are much higher now in fact improving overall performance.
|
| Philipp Matuschka (MMB) 11/29/2013 5:30:07 AM I noticed this morning that if I am looking at a sub view and decide to sort it by any particular column, when it comes back it is once again displaying the master record with the first subview, not the one I was in. That is quite frustrating.
|
| Robert Gustavsson 11/29/2013 5:38:19 AM OK, I see, that makes sense. In my case most detail views have just a few records, which (in combination with maybe higher latency from Europe) in practice results in longer loading times for the details I was looking for. Automatic loading of the the detail views if they have a small number of records would be nice.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/29/2013 5:56:44 AM @Robert: data size overhead comparing to old view is next to nothing so I guess it's not a big problem. Switching between old and new logic based of the number of records will nullify all the advantages of the new one since we'll need to calculate number of records which, based on complexity of a view's filter might be quite expensive operation. However it looks like we can solve some issues with quite simple trick.
At the moment we stop loading detail views if they are just below browser's window bottom edge. Perhaps we can lower this bar so that we'll load next few short detail views in advance. Though we would like to collect some "real world" usage statistics prior to making any changes.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/29/2013 7:23:48 AM @Philipp - thanks for the report, fixed
|
| martin oliver 11/29/2013 1:07:01 PM @Slava wrote
"I'd recommend you to reorder detail tables so that table of interest is displayed first - first tab is always loaded together with main record form."
This is not a solution for us we need to see second tab as well as first
@Kirill "perhaps we can lower this bar" could work for us
|
| basenine 1/9/2014 5:55:42 PM Is there any news about using this feature on a per table basis? Some records only have small amounts of related data and the load times between tabs (on first load) can be frustrating. Also, for same reasons @Nathan and @Rick mention above. Toggling @ User Interface level would be my preferred solution.
|
| Slava Shinderov 1/10/2014 5:42:26 AM @All we've added ability to control how detail views are displayed - using tabs or list. You may configure it for each table on order details screen.
|
| basenine 1/10/2014 5:47:52 AM Beautiful. Thanks Slava 😃
|
 | Blake Cabot 1/10/2014 6:56:46 AM Also can you show the related list when in edit mode?
|
| Slava Shinderov 1/10/2014 7:10:13 AM @Blake theoretically we can show them, but there is no sense for that since master and detail records can't be edited as a whole.
So for now we've no plans to move in such direction.
|
| Blake Cabot 1/10/2014 4:25:17 PM The issue that we are facing is related to the orders and order line items. The customer service person needs to make notes in the order and see what they ordered. Currently she can't. Does that make sense?
Thanks
blake
|
| Slava Shinderov 1/10/2014 4:48:39 PM @Blake we'll not discuss it here, please open separate idea if you wish to push it.
|
| Slava Shinderov 1/15/2014 9:45:42 AM |
| Philipp Matuschka (MMB) 11/2/2015 11:15:54 AM Slava
I just noticed that where there are for example 4 sub tabs and I am viewing any tab other than the first one and I press a field header to change the sorting, when the page redisplays it is back to the first tab. I find this quite frustrating. Can it be programmed to redisplay on the tab on which I was.
Thanks
|
