I think Fibery can be the GOAT tool. And yes, then you will have a ton of information complexity and density. That’s why we’ve build the ‘menu pages’ as mentioned in the above post. Since we’re building a workspace so you can manage your whole company. And that’s a lot 
It’s basically ERP / CRM / PM / Second Brain / Finance / Marketing solution all in Fibery.
Agreed and voted! Thank you for posting this.
I have had the same thought as I want to avoid making new views just for filters. I have some very varied data set up in Fibery and often want to use a few different types of filters and would love to just be able to ‘activate’ certain filters at some time. Whilst it’s not hard to set up the filter again necessarily, some of the previous ones I’ve used have a lot of conditions so it can be a bit tedious to set up after clearing.
I would love a few filter profiles that I can activate or deactivate as needed and would save a lot of time and be very convenient 
2 Likes
Hi @mdubakov. I stumbled on this post because at my company we have a view to manage our dev process, just like pretty much everyone here, and I wanted to see only the items that are assigned to me. I created the filter, and saw the data I needed. However, I wanted to toggle that on and off so I could easily go back and forth in the future, but found that I can’t. Then I started thinking about saved filters. then I found this post and found myself agreeing with you that there is a problem, and that saved views might be the answer, but there’s a question about where the line should be drawn. I do think it is time for Fibery to be opinionated about where to draw that line, and then do it. In my opinion (that you can take and run with if you like it), a personal saved view (at least for a board) should include Filter, Sort, and Colors. Not Cards, and Not Fields.
If you don’t like that idea/opinion, let me share a different way to tackle this problem. Let’s do it like you say, where we create our own private variations of public views. But I don’t want to stick them in My Space, lost among all the other stuff. I want my private variation of the public view to keep its association to the public view, and be accessible from the public view. Just give me a list of “My Saved Views” at the top of the public view. It isn’t anything special, just a list of views that I cloned and modified. Think of them as private child views if you want. Then I don’t lose my flow when I’m on the main public board, and I just want to see my own private child view of it. I don’t expect any changes to the main public board to cascade down to the child view (even though that might be desired in some situations).
I think you could run with either of these ideas (or something like them) without screwing up Fibery.
A lot of what has been discussed in this thread, will be possible if the architecture of views are upgraded, in that views databases become accessible to users as Views Entities, just like other databases, this would be a leap in the power of Fibery.
(As a workaround I’m now trying to mimick that with a ‘View’ database and a URL field, which sucks and is not scalable)
The good thing is that Fibery Views are not merely configuration like in data management systems with dynamic configuration views, but in Fibery they are already entities with Id, so the step to upgrade them is pretty straigtforward.
If List/Table/Board Views become first class citizens in Fibery, we can do all kinds of things them, including:
the feature that is worked on now, being Entity Views as announced last week:
- July 4, 2024 / New shapes in Whiteboard view, hide when empty per field setting in views - #11 by Zauri
- July 4, 2024 / New shapes in Whiteboard view, hide when empty per field setting in views - #18 by Zauri
…which basically means that the same List View could have multiple List Entity Views that the user can create and configure.
There is no such thing as a ‘view database’ and I’m not sure what you think can be gained by making views into entities.
Views are effectively a UI service that sits on top of database queries. If you make views into entities, you would still need a UI service to query them. It’s ‘turtles all the way down’
1 Like
Ok just popping back in here after a long pause. Apologies for creating a mini thought-storm and then ditching the thread, I just couldn’t make time to refine my thoughts and have it make more sense.
What I just realized now, after the latest release, is this: all of what I was saying is that we would LOVE the equivalent of ‘Entity Views’ on Timeline, Boards, etc., and most critically, the ability to pin those views. It’s the ‘pinning’ part that closes the loop and creates really beautiful coherence for this usecase.
I could go into more specifics on what Entity Views (“View” Views ) would be solving and could look like. It feels now though that we have a shared language finally. Thoughts?
Some progress
1 Like
Quick Filters released today
Beautiful, love it, can’t say enough good things about it. Thank you thank you!!
Quick/pinned filters in relation views have been a huge improvement for us, but there’s a painpoint that has popped up. The content in the relation view is dynamic because it has a context filter applied to it, but the filters don’t.
Our biggest challenge is in our “sprint” entities. They have a relation view that shows all “tasks” linked to the sprint and we’ve manually created pinned filters so the “task owner” can be quickly filtered. This is fine if the users that are assigned to tasks in each sprint are always the same, but for us every sprint has a different mix of users and so we need either constantly be pinning/repinning filters each time a user looks at the sprint they’re in, or we just pin a filter for every possible user, even if they don’t have any tasks in that sprint, which causes confusion and takes up screen real estate.
Ideally we could have a dynamic quick filter where the options are generated by values from the entities that have been context filtered…does that make sense?
For example, if I’m looking at Tasks as a relation view inside of a Sprint, I’d like to create a filter like so:
Task Owners of Tasks {from Tasks in Sprint X}
instead of like this:
Task Owner is John
Task Owner is Mary
Task Owner is Steve
Task Owner is David
Task Owner is Andrea
etc, etc
1 Like
Maybe you could enable the Owner field on the relation view, and then use the search-within-the-view (type the name of any owner you want to filter on)?
Yeah, now that that feature was added recently that is one way to do it. I know our teams like the simple one-click button interface that the pinned filters provide, so hopefully that could be extended to be more dynamic/contextual in the future.