📌Allow the same action names, bots and format rules, if they belong to different tables

[Gustavo_Eduardo]

Dear AppSheet Team, allow the same action names if they belong to different tables

In our ongoing effort to keep the editor organized, actions are grouped by tables. Additionally, system actions are always the same (add, delete, edit, etc.) and are automatically named by the system based on their context {the table}.

However, when we create an action—let's say "update" for one table, and "update" for another table—the system renames the second table's "update" as "update 2" because it assumes there are two actions with the same name. While this makes sense within the context of the same table, it would be helpful to allow identical names for actions across different tables, since actions are understood in their context (just like add, delete, edit).

This current behavior forces us to rewrite the table name (even though the action is already organized by table), which seems entirely redundant.

For example:

• For the "customers" table:
  our actions {customers_update}, system actions {add, delete, edit}

• For the "works" table:
  our actions {works_update}, system actions {add, delete, edit}

When it could simply be:

• For the "customers" table:
  update, add, delete, edit

• For the "works" table:
  update, add, delete, edit

But this doesn't happen, what happens is this if we try:

• For the "customers" table:
  update, add, delete, edit

• For the "works" table:
  update 2, add, delete, edit

Don't you agree?

This would allow the names to focus solely on the purpose of the action, making them shorter, and we wouldn't need to differentiate them by adding redundant information.

I appreciate your attention to this matter, as it doesn't seem like a small issue. Thank you in advance!

The same goes for bots and format rules

Best regards!

[scott192]

100 percent agree with this!  System action names do seem to be treated differently to user generated ones.

I was also looking at actions yesterday and lamenting any kind of organisational structure in the sidebar for finding specific ones after you've forgotten what some do...especially actions that are meant to be used in groups.

I did think that grouped actions could show as expandable links that would show any actions within that group...even if the action is in multiple groups.  This would look like the way Tables and Table Slices are accessed.  Probably a complex thing to do for the devs though.

[Gustavo_Eduardo]

Thank you very much for the valuable comment @scott192. I hope this is addressed soon. For now, what I'm doing right now is naming the actions like this; imagine a table called "customers":

c_d4_update_row

c: initial or code letter for customer table

d4: data action number 4, set the value of some column in this row

purpose: update_row

It's a bit cryptic and convoluted, but it's short and easy to understand.

[Gustavo_Eduardo]

@amyplin Please, if you can, tell the team about this.

[Shahaf]

Thank you for the suggestion and detailed explanation! We logged this to our backlog and will take a look at the feasibility of this idea.

[Gustavo_Eduardo]

 @Shahaf Thank you very much for accepting this. And thank you so much for all the work you're doing. We feel incredibly supported. I invite you to visit the AppSheet naming protocol that I created, which will (largely) be modified when these features are active. Here you will understand a little about how we, the developers at AppSheet, experience it.