Context
Sometimes we need to create similar views for an entity differed by only filter type.
How does it work now
In this case each time I have to set up a table with needed fields to show, needed order, and it’s hard to preserve consistency across different views.
Possible solution
I suggest to add a possibility to set default visible fields (and their order), it can be done on the screen of setting up a class.
Given that an entity can be displayed in many ways (card view, table view, board view, list view etc.) I am not sure how meaningful it is to define default visible fields. Given that the different views serve different purposes, it is unlikely that the default visible fields will be the same for all views.
Ditto field order.
Isn’t it easier to use ‘Duplicate table’ once you have fields set up as you like, and then change the filter settings that are to be applied?
I was talking about the table view. Default fields for the table view. Copying and pasting tables will not give you consistency after modifying the class.
I see your point though, and suggested by me ‘merging’ of the class structure and table templates (it may be treated as table view templates) might not be the best solution. For my workflow it seems the easier way to manage different table views for a class.
So you mean that if you add a new field to a type, you would want to enable/disable visibility and arrange field order on the type definition page, and then have these choices ‘pushed’ to existing tables (and be the default for new tables), right?
Yeah, you are right. If the table view was not customised all the choices should propagate to such tables.
