Hey my Fibery peeps! Been watching this product with increasing interest and I’m convinced that it (and team) are destined for great things. Enough fanboi, lets get to it…
In a workflow i’m creating, one area of interest is the ability to add Fields to a Type as it moves through the different States of the workflow. I don’t see how this is possible in the current state but can you good folks think of another way to do this? An example would be building a website. First state is “Research” so you add your compiled research materials in that state, next state would be “Wireframe” so you’d add your wireframes and fill in appropriate fields when in this state, etc.
You don’t want you team wireframing when they should be researching so I don’t want them to access the Wireframe fields, therefore jamming all the fields under Type up front is less desirable.
I think we’ve talked about what you’re referring to in a few discussions I’m highlighting here:
I agree with this request. I have played a lot with a tool called Pipefy that does great with what you are talking about. I think this type of functionality would be great in handling Process Management, which is another need I have and would love to be able to handle in Fibery as opposed to looking elsewhere.
State-dependent field visibility would be another interesting thing to do with Field Grouping which has been discussed elsewhere. Whether this is specific to an Extension like Workflow or is more general (i.e. control visibility of fields depending on content of any other field) would change things, but either would be useful.
That said I for one would be interested in more clarity/specifics around your use case here. On a simple read of what you’re describing, it seems to me that having the thing that has “stages” being a parent Type, and your Stages being sub-types is the current (perhaps non-ideal) way to handle this. In other words you have all fields that are common to all stages in the parent Type. Fields that are only relevant to specific stages go in sub-types. Does that address your need at all? Either way would love to have some more details on what you’re trying to do.
Actually yes, it looks like creating Parent/Child relations may solve it, but this is without diving in and seeing how deep I need to go (how many layers to achieve the goal). I’ll work this through and report back if I get stuck.
Thanks so much for chiming in to help! It’s much appreciated.
My pleasure! There are so many potentially good feature requests here, I figure it can help to triage them if we all help each other think through our workflows where possible. When something can be done “well enough” with existing functionality, that can encourage adoption sooner than later, which means more money and users for Fibery, which means faster development. It’s a virtuous cycle that I can contribute to in some small way, and at the same time serve my own needs by hopefully encouraging/enabling that development throughput increase.
(also I just like helping people and thinking about problems that aren’t my own!)
