Thanks @Viktoria 
, I do not consider this a new feature; I would expect the same behavior as Airtable, equal to the same view I have on Airtable. Without these filters risk to view records that the user must NOT see and must NOT use (because expired, because not of competence, because owned by other users, etc.) 
I see what you mean and share your opinion, but unfortunately at the moment the linked list views aren’t supported yet.
Hope the team will find a solution and implementation will be available soon.
2 Likes
Hi @Lucap6 I’m not sure if you saw the updates, I would like to share good news with you. We implemented limit by view of linked fields feature several weeks ago. Hope it will be helpful for your app 
Yes, I saw the update! Thank you all
1 Like
Hi Viktoria,
that sound just like the feature I desperately depend on. Where do I find this option?
I have two tables. Each one displayed on softr as a list. One List is filled by the user through “add record” and the other list is prefilled by us and cannot be edited expect the linked records. The user gets to link those tables by “edit record”. Because the user’s data is sensible, we want every user to be limited to view only records created by themselves. This ultimately makes us depend on this feature.
I really hope this feature fixes this. In case it does not, did anyone else find a working solution?
If anyone is interested in what it is used for. We use this to give contractors the chance to fill allocated shifts with their staff. So one table shifts and one table staff. Obviously, we only want each contractor to only see their own staff and allocated shifts.
Hi @PaulKalvelage I think for this specific use-case a workaround might help.
In general, if you limit the linked selections based on view in Airtable, Softr will show only the options that are available in the limited Airtable view.
Keeping that in mind, here is what I would personally do:
- I would create different views in Airtable for the original table that is used for the linked records and I would filter those views based on the user groups.
So let’s say I have User 1 who should only see option 1,2 and I have User 2 who should only see options 3 and 4. I would create one view for User 1 and filter the data based on the user. Then I would create view 2 and filter the data based on his/her info. So that each view shows only the options related to the corresponding user. - Then I would create new linked fields for each view in the table where you would like the end users to edit them.
- Afterward, I would create corresponding user groups in Softr (User 1, User 2) and set up Action buttons with corresponding visibility settings. So that User 1 sees only the action button 1, User 2 - Action button 2
- Each action button should be mapped to the field that is limited by the corresponding view.
As a result, when editing, each user group will be able to see only the options that are available for them in the limited view.
Hope it makes sense and was helpful
Hi Viktoria,
Firstly, I would like to express my gratitude for your swift response. After much consideration, it appears that the proposed workaround may only be effective for a small user base. However, once we try to scale this process, we may face a complex situation with an overwhelming number of linked fields.
In practice, maintaining such an arrangement could require significant effort, since each user’s settings would need to be individually adjusted within Softr, along with the creation of a unique view in Airtable. This, unfortunately, does not seem to be the most efficient or scalable solution.
Right now, an Airtable-extension called “mini-extensions” does exactly that. The extensions facilitate client-dependent linked record handling while also providing a client portal interface. But certainly not in a rich App environment like Softr.
It would be really helpful if we could restrict certain options in the dropdown menu for specific users at the action menu. I think it’s a logical feature to have, especially since it already works on other levels. To clarify my point, I created a basic mockup of the settings I would require.
I am delighted to see that the needs of ‘Lucap6’ are being addressed within Softr. If you could also consider implementing the feature I mentioned, I believe it would greatly enhance our functionality.
Thank you for considering my input.
1 Like
Thank you for your message @PaulKalvelage
Indeed, I can see your point, this isn’t the best option for scalable project and big user base.
Let me share your feedback with the team to consider for future improvements. Hope it will be implemented soon.
This feature is indeed needed and wanted by all softr clients I know and a classic need for any app.
We have been waiting for this very needed feature
Hello everyone, if you’re referring to the feature to limit the linked records by view, it’s already live, but the dropdown based on a specific condition isn’t available yet.
As far as I know it’s in the roadmap, but I’m not able to share a timeline yet. Hope it will be implemented soon.
Hi all, we’ve begun working on a feature to solve this need, but the solution we’re going with will be more comprehensive than just restricting dropdown options (local restrictions).
It’ll be an app-level record restriction you can set once → Have it apply across the app (global restriction). So you won’t have to set up a conditional filter for every feature, which we know is inconvenient, hard to maintain, and error prone.
1 Like
Can you elaborate anymore on how this solution is planned to work? If the plan is to filter based off an Airtable view, that would be really limiting and wouldn’t solve this issue for me. I would rather it be more dynamic, like having a dropdown populated by a one field that posts to a new field.
If that doesn’t make sense, let me know and I can try to explain further.
2 Likes
Exactly. Upvote.
You are very right to work this feature as a global restriction instead of doing it field by field.
Is there any chance this new feature could also help filtering the inline-filters shown to the end user when the shown filters are coming from linked records?
This is great news! Although we would much prefer the mockup solution by @PaulKalvelage (or even a combination of global and local), this could be incredibly useful. We have spent countless hours trying to find workarounds only to hit a dead end time and time again.
1 Like
We will support both eventually 
Right now we’re exploring 1) global restrictions based on user’s record ownership → This extends to not just dropdown but also inline filter, conditional filter on each block. It’s the most critical for any portal use cases.
Something similar @PaulKalvelage’s solution will also be needed → This 2) local filter can filter data based on other variables, such as:
- Current list details record’s attribute
- Previous user inputs on the same form.
3 Likes
I have at least two big projects that are blocked by this limit. An implementation like this could lead to a “boom” in the use of Softr in numerous contexts! We are waiting!
1 Like
