# Allow Collection Views to Traverse To-One Relations

**URL:** <https://community.fibery.io/t/allow-collection-views-to-traverse-to-one-relations/9281>\
**Category:** Ideas & Features\
**Tags:** table-view, list-view\
**Created:** [July 27, 2025, 12:42pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/allow-collection-views-to-traverse-to-one-relations/9281 "2025-07-27T12:42:10Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Yuri\_BC](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/yuri_bc/32/8803_2.png) [@Yuri\_BC](https://community.fibery.io/u/Yuri_BC)\
**Post date:** [July 27, 2025, 12:42pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/allow-collection-views-to-traverse-to-one-relations/9281/1 "2025-07-27T12:42:10Z")

</div>

### **Feature Request: Allow Collection Views to Traverse To-One Relations**

**Problem**  
Fibery views cannot display collections from a related entity accessed via a `To-One` relation.  
Example:  
If `Page.MainFrame → Frame`, and `Frame → Blocks`,  
there’s no way to show `Frame.ContainedBlocks` in the `Page` view.

**Current Limitation**  
The view rendering engine only supports direct collections from the current entity. It does not resolve relation chains like `ThisEntity.ToOneRelation.Collection`.

**Why This Matters**  
This blocks clean separation between structure (`Frame`) and content (`Block`). It forces workarounds like adding backreferences or syncing `Block.Page` manually.

**Request**  
Allow collection views to traverse one level through a `To-One` relation.  
Example supported patterns:

- `This.MainFrame.ContainedBlocks`
- View filter: `Block.ParentFrame = This.MainFrame`

**Technically Feasible**  
Fibery already supports this in formulas and the API. The view engine just needs dereferencing support in embedded view configs.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Yuri\_BC](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/yuri_bc/32/8803_2.png) [@Yuri\_BC](https://community.fibery.io/u/Yuri_BC)\
**Post date:** [July 27, 2025, 1:01pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/allow-collection-views-to-traverse-to-one-relations/9281/2 "2025-07-27T13:01:14Z")

</div>

**Use Cases:**

- **HR** : Show `Performance Comments` in `Employee` view via → `Current Employment Record → Comments`  
(Clean `To-One`, avoids duplicate links and broken ownership)

- **Finance** : Show `Invoices` in `Customer` view via → `Account Profile → Invoices`  
(Each customer has one profile; no need for direct invoice duplication)

- **Projects** : Show `Tasks` in `Project` view via → `Active Plan → Tasks`  
(Swappable plan structure without schema hacks or view limits)

**Why Not Use `To-Many` Instead of `To-One`**

- Implies multiple active records— **not accurate** if only one is valid
- Requires filtering logic (e.g. “latest by date”)— **not supported in views**
- Adds fragility and UI workarounds

**Why Not Use Both `To-One` and `To-Many`**

- **Redundant** schema—same data linked twice
- **Risk of desync** —can’t guarantee `To-One` matches filtered `To-Many`
- **Clutters** filters, automations, and user understanding

**Better**

Use one clean `To-One` (e.g. `Employee → Current Record`)  
Then enable view traversal:

```plaintext
This.CurrentRecord.Comments

```

Simple, accurate, and maintainable.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RonMakesSystems](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/ronmakessystems/32/14122_2.png) [@RonMakesSystems](https://community.fibery.io/u/RonMakesSystems)\
**Post date:** [January 27, 2026, 3:54am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/allow-collection-views-to-traverse-to-one-relations/9281/3 "2026-01-27T03:54:03Z")

</div>

I just faced this and its quite a problem… changing it to to-many goes against how the schema should be operated.

My usecase: Project → Steps ← Step Template ↔ Documentation.  
I’d like to show the documentation on the project, but this only gets allows if the steps to step template is many to many.

Somewhat similar to this: [Stop treating "to-one" relation fields like a red-headed stepchild!](https://community.fibery.io/t/stop-treating-to-one-relation-fields-like-a-red-headed-stepchild/8739)