Nested Filters

gbuckley
gbuckley Salt Lake City, UT 🟡

Hi all,

I’ve run into a puzzle on a dashboard and am wondering if you have advice. (See screenshot for dummy data to illustrate the issue).

 

All charts in the dashboard are filtered by the “State” column.

 

Initially, we were going to just have the user select their “State” in a filter. The issue is that “State” is kind of a super-category. Multiple “Parks” might be in one state. (Each park corresponds to one and only one state). A user will for sure know which park they are in, but might not know which state that park belongs to.

 

So the ideal output is to have a filter on the dashboard for “Park.” The user chooses their “Park,” and then all cards on the dashboard are filtered by the corresponding “State.” (We’d also have a card informing the user which state their park pertains to).

 

Is it possible to filter by a field ("State") that is “looked up” by another filter ("Park")?

 

@jaeW_at_Onyx  you know you want to make a video for this one

Tagged:

Best Answer

  • jaeW_at_Onyx
    jaeW_at_Onyx Budapest / Portland, OR 🟤
    Accepted Answer

    @rgbuckley no video required! ?

     

    it sounds like you want to apply a filter (Park) that then applies a 'looser' filter' on the data (State).  The short answer is ... no the Domo UI can't do that yet.  An upcoming feature 'Filter Groups' may help with that.

     

    What you can do if you only have a few parks per state, you could duplicate the entire State data for each park in that State.

     

    So if I had Crystal Lake, and Ainsworth and Angel's Rest in OR, then I would duplicate the data 3x one for each Park.  Then you don't have to worry about applying a 'looser' filter. 

     

     

    Then when the Park Group = Group Actual, then I know that's data about THAT park.

     

    Capture.PNG

Answers

  • Thanks Jae!

    I ended up taking your advice and cross joined park and state. The filtering then worked! And be concatenating park and state and then using distinct count I was able to mostly preserve accurate aggregations despite the increased row count. Much appreciated!

This discussion has been closed.