2-Way Relationship Binding

Follow

Caleb Roseland

• December 15, 2014 18:15

When adding a relationship field to an item template, it would be great to have an option to enable 2-way binding and 2-way viewing.

Ex:

Add relationship field from:

Contact -> Company

If there is a relationship field from Contact -> Company and a relationship field from Contact <- Company, then

Show contact item in Contacts relationship field in Company, instead of showing contact item in Related Items in Company

Basically,

If:
Contact -> Company
and:
Contact <- Company
then:
Contact <-> Company

It would be nice to show the relationship in the proper relationship field, instead of "Related To" in either Contacts or Companies app if the relationship logic is 2-way.

11

• Official comment

  

  Joseph Espinoza

  • December 16, 2014 02:00

  Thanks for the input Caleb! We appreciate the feedback. :)

  /Joseph – Podio

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Vincent Poirier

  • December 15, 2014 18:21

  That's not a bad idea.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Roger Jesrani

  • March 31, 2015 15:43

  We are running into this exact issue. Is there any way to accomplish this in the current implementation?

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Jacquelyn May

  • April 07, 2015 21:59

  Hi Roger,

  It isn't currently a true 2-way link. Since the relationship field only exists in one app, any items added to that field would get a "related items" section on the other side.

  So linked items are always linked from both sides, they just look a bit different since the actual relationship field is only in one app.

  Hope that makes sense.

  /Jacquelyn - Podio

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Roger Jesrani

  • April 07, 2015 22:04

  Thanks Jacquelyn! What would be very helpful is if you could filter, sort, view, etc. on related items. So even if the relationship field is in the other table, you can still get all the benefits of it being local.

  Not being able to filter on related items is our main problem with how relationships are implemented.

  Thanks,

  Roger

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Matthew Rideout

  • December 27, 2016 22:57

  Caleb I have come across this many times. I currently believe I have a simple solution through Workflows 

  1

  Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.