User-created REF_ROWS VCs "choosing" the incorrect inline view to use

[Marc_Dillon]

I suspect this may be something to send to support, but just in case anyone has seen anything like it before (or someone sees it in the future)…

I have one table that has a large number of columns. So I’ve split the columns up into different sections, and each section gets its own slice. Next, I generated a virtual column, with a ref_rows formula, for each slice. This trick is outlined better in this post by @GreenFlux

Detail Views: Space-Saving Trick to Display Columns Horizontally Tips & Tricks 💡

Detail Views show all the columns stacked vertically, which leaves a lot of wasted screen space. [02%20AM] Make certain columns display in a horizontal list by creating a slice, and a virtual column: Add slice, select the columns you want, also add the Key column. [40%20AM] Add a Virtual Column: REF_ROWS(“SliceName”,“KeyColumnName”) this relates every record back to itself, with the child being the new slice with limited columns [39%20AM] Replace the individual columns on the det…

So this generates an inline view, in the main detail view, for each ref_rows VC. For 5 out of 6 of these, the system has selected the appropriate inline view to display. For 1 of these, it has selected incorrectly, and instead shows the inline view of a different slice. This is shown below, notice the inline table for “On Hold” is same as for the “Files”:

"Screenshot

And clicking on “View”, in the emulator, does indicate that the view is the same one.

I DID make sure to create a table view, in ref position, for each slice. Here are additional setup/definition screenshots:

Definitions Summary

Slices:

Screenshot

VCs:

Screenshot

Slice Tables:

Screenshot

Orders Detail view:

"Screenshot

If you thoroughly looked through the above definitions, you’ll notice I created a second ref_rows vc “On Hold 2”, with the exact same expression as “On Hold”. This copy does seem to work, and shows the correct inline table. So this situation is “solved”…I guess.

Screenshot

[Steve]

[Marc_Dillon]

Oh wow, would you look at that. Is that a new option?

[Steve]

It may be relatively new, within the last six months? I agree it seems like it hasn’t always been there.

[Koichi_Tsuji]

Yeah, we need to save the editor to get type details appearing. I remember I make the feature request before, i.e type details should be made visible and avaiable without saving app definition, otherwise majority of the people does not get noticed that this option is in there.