Form: Dynamic conditional filters for linked record fields

We’ve added the ability to dynamically filter linked record fields. This feature has been highly requested. You can see the feature in action here:

If you have any feedback about this, please post it below or reach out to us in chat!

1 Like

Thanks @Abdul This is really awesome!

1 Like

Wow this is cool! Can you add the ability to rename the filter fields, or make it clear that these are filters?

The current implementation can get a bit confusing for people who are new to using the form. They don’t understand which parts are filters and which are required fields

1 Like

I forwarded your request to the team to see if it’s possible to have the ability to set custom titles for filter fields. I’ll let keep you posted if there’s any updates on this. Let us know if you have any other feedback!

1 Like

Hello, love this functionality but wondering if it is also possible to allow this kind of filtering dynamically where the filter is passed through automatically, but hidden. So for example, if in the portal you click to edit a record and in the edit form, you can select which records to link to. However, the only availabl linked record option would be based on a different linked record field. However, you wouldnt need to see that field and make a selection to cause the filtered options to show.

It’s not clear to me what you’re suggesting here. Can you describe the problem you’re trying to solve with a real life example? It helps us understand the core issue.

This is a great feature for use cases where users are going to select a linked record item which is based on the same category; once they try to change the conditional filter, all the other selections are gone. I was trying this feature out, as sometimes my users wouldn’t be able to find their linked records and would need filters, but because of this limitation, it wouldn’t work when users also need to select another linked record from a different category. This kind of filter existed in the old form; simply bringing the same feature would be useful. I also have another suggestion, based on my comment on the QR Scan Topic