Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Assign a record identifier. #2219

Closed
Bonapara opened this issue Oct 24, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Assign a record identifier. #2219

Bonapara opened this issue Oct 24, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
scope: back+front Issues requiring full-stack knowledge size: long

Comments

@Bonapara
Copy link
Member

Bonapara commented Oct 24, 2023

Scope & Context

The identifiers for records in an object view are the "name" and "illustration" of each record, They will be displayed in the first column of an object table view.

  • Record text identifier can either be a text field or a Number field. (In the future they might also be Computed fields)
  • Record image identifier should be an image field type (Not implemented yet)

image

Expected behavior

In the settings, on a Custom Object detail page, the second column of the fields should be "Identifier" instead of "Field type" (As all fields of a custom object are custom)

image

Edit a record text identifier

The first method is to click on the dropdown menu for the fields:

image

The second method is shown in the creation and detail page of the custom field settings. But only for custom fields of custom objects! As mention in the scope section, this section should only appear when the above field type has been set to text or number

image

Table views

As for Standard objects, the record identifier should be displayed in the first column of the table. It should not be movable or hideable.

Figma

https://www.figma.com/file/xt8O9mFeLl46C5InWwoMrN/Twenty?type=design&node-id=11383-58516&mode=design&t=JFqF92iemcbzIUHs-4

@FelixMalfait
Copy link
Member

Note we also have a similar concept on standard objects (cf entityChipDisplayMapper I think), we should probably unify all

@Bonapara
Copy link
Member Author

Depreciated & replaced by: #2489

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🆕 New to ✅ Done in Product development ✅ Nov 13, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
scope: back+front Issues requiring full-stack knowledge size: long
Projects
Archived in project
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants