Skip to main content

Can we please have an option for Sections to be collapsed?

Currently, the only was to collapse a Section is make it “Repeatable”.  This creates extra work for the office as they have to delete headers which say, for example, “shower photos 1” and are redundant on the final report.

It would be very helpful with larger reports to have the sections collapsed as scrolling through dozens of questions instead of a few sections is tedious on a mobile device.

Hey @Sean Baker 👋🏼 thanks for sharing your idea here!

If I understand correctly, depending on how your template is structured, this should be achievable already on both the web app and the mobile app – I’ve attached a screenshot for the option to collapse sections on the mobile app.

Please let me know if you meant something else :)


I am actually looking for it to be the default setting.

When we have larger reports with multiple questions, it can be difficult to manually collapse the Sections.

This is compounded when a tech is wearing gloves and trying to scroll through the report.

When the Section is made Repeatable, the default is for the Section to be collapsed.

I’m sorry that I didn’t clarify that originally.

Cheers

 

 

 

 


Hi @Sean Baker thanks so much for clarifying 

While currently we don’t have the default collapse option but it is something that customers like yourself have been signalling a desire for. Thank you for speaking up and flagging this with us as it really helps us with prioritisation. 

While we don’t have concrete dates on when we might pursue the building of this feature it is something we want to find the runway to commit to in the future so stay tuned! 

All the best,

Paddy. 


The following idea has been merged into this idea:

All the votes have been transferred into this idea.

NewNot planned

Hi @Sean Baker thanks so much for clarifying 

While currently we don’t have the default collapse option but it is something that customers like yourself have been signalling a desire for. Thank you for speaking up and flagging this with us as it really helps us with prioritisation. 

While we don’t have concrete dates on when we might pursue the building of this feature it is something we want to find the runway to commit to in the future so stay tuned! 

All the best,

Paddy. 

Has there been any update to this? I too would like to see the sections collapsed as a default, or at least be able to select the default presentation of sections in a template.


please provide an update on this, I have large inspection templates and having sections that can’t be default closed makes them too large  


please provide an update on this, I have large inspection templates and having sections that can’t be default closed makes them too large  

 

Seeing as this topic has gone from “New” to “Not Planned” I’d suggest a restructuring of your current inspections into smaller sections. I know this doesn’t sound like great advice, but there are likely categories that you can create to help correct this issue.

Another inelegant solution is to create an inspection just for this department that needs to complete that section. 

 

Perhaps asking for an option for bigger section headers might lead to a solution, as working with gloves is common in an industrial setting.  

 


unfortunately, that doesn’t work for our inspections, they are already broken down as much as possible. It seems silly to have the collapsible sections as a feature if they can’t be used productively.


Hi Everyone - thank you for following this back up. Can I please confirm if you want the sections collapsed by default when editing the template, conducting the inspection or both?

We still do not have any firm date to implement these changes, but the more information we have, the better.

Thank you!

Karen


Hello,

please can there be an option that the sections are collapsed by default when conducting/opening the inspection. At the moment it opens with them all open which negates the point of having the sections. This makes the inspections less efficient when out in the field. 

Thanks


Thanks for the clarity ​@Environment