Field Type Reference Table¶
This comprehensive reference provides detailed specifications for all Fieldmark field types, supporting informed selection for digital data collection notebook design. We present technical capabilities, validation options, and platform-specific considerations for each field type within the Designer interface.
Text and Identifier Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Text field (single-line) |
Brief textual entries where neither controlled vocabularies nor auto-generation are appropriate |
“North wall”, “Sandy matrix”, “Excavator notes” |
Character limit: ~255 practical maximum |
Pattern matching via regex |
Universal compatibility |
Text field (multi-line) |
Extended descriptive content requiring paragraph formatting (same Text field, multi-line option enabled) |
Context descriptions, interpretation notes, detailed observations |
No practical character limit |
Length validation |
Touch keyboard challenges on mobile |
Validated email address collection |
“projectlead@university.edu”, “lab@institution.org” |
Standard email validation |
RFC 5322 compliant validation |
Keyboard switches to email mode on mobile |
|
Address |
Structured physical address components |
Site locations, institutional addresses, property details |
Multiple sub-fields (street, city, state, postcode) |
Component-level validation |
Auto-complete varies by platform |
Templated String |
Auto-generated identifiers combining multiple field values |
“SITE1-2024-CTX045”, |
Mustache.js templating |
Not user-editable |
Essential for human-readable IDs |
QR/Barcode Scanner |
Camera-based code capture for pre-printed labels |
Specimen barcodes, equipment tags, location markers |
Supports multiple formats (QR, Code128, etc.) |
Format validation possible |
Mobile applications only |
Numeric Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number Field |
Numeric entry with optional minimum and maximum bounds |
Artefact counts, simple measurements, pH (0–14), percentage (0–100), depth (0–500cm) |
Integer or decimal |
Type checking |
Period (.) required for decimals |
Controlled Number (deprecated) |
Legacy bounded numeric entry (kept for backwards compatibility); use Number Field with min/max bounds for new forms |
pH (0–14), percentage (0–100), depth (0–500cm) |
Min/max enforcement |
Range validation |
Existing fields remain supported; not available in the add-field chooser |
Percentage Slider |
Visual 0–100 style percentage entry |
Canopy cover, completion %, rough proportions |
Integer values |
Range + step grid validation |
Click or drag on track and thumb |
Auto-incrementing |
Sequential identifier generation |
Context numbers (001, 002…), Sample IDs |
Configurable padding |
Uniqueness guaranteed |
Cannot reset mid-project |
Date and Time Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Date Picker |
Calendar date selection without time |
Excavation date, sample collection date |
ISO 8601 format |
Min/max date ranges |
Native date pickers on mobile |
DateTime Picker |
Combined date and time selection with optional one-tap “Now” button |
Observation moments, scheduled records, event timing |
ISO 8601 with time |
Date and time ranges |
Platform-specific interfaces; recommended date-time field |
DateTime Now (deprecated) |
Legacy one-tap current-timestamp capture (kept for backwards compatibility); use DateTime Picker with “Now” button enabled |
Record creation time, observation moment |
Automatic capture |
Always valid |
Existing fields remain supported; not available in the add-field chooser |
Month Picker |
Year and month selection only |
Seasonal data, approximate dates |
YYYY-MM format |
Year range limits |
Simplified interface |
Selection Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Checkbox (deprecated) |
Legacy binary true/false decisions (kept for backwards compatibility) |
“Sample collected?”, “Photography complete?” |
Returns: Boolean |
Required completion |
Large touch target on mobile |
Radio Buttons |
Single selection from 2–7 visible options |
Preservation state, weather conditions |
All options visible |
Required selection |
Excellent mobile usability |
Dropdown (Select) (deprecated) |
Legacy dropdown single selection (kept for backwards compatibility) |
Species list (50+ items), material types |
Conserves screen space |
Required selection |
Existing fields remain supported; not available in the add-field chooser. Prefer “Radio Buttons” for new forms |
Multi-select |
Multiple simultaneous selections |
Construction materials, observed behaviours |
Checkbox list |
Min/max selections |
Touch selection challenging |
Hierarchical Dropdown |
Nested categorical selection |
Taxonomies, period → phase → subphase |
Tree navigation |
Depth validation |
Complex navigation on mobile |
Spatial Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Take GPS Point |
Single coordinate capture |
Find spots, sample locations, photo positions |
Returns: GeoJSON point |
Accuracy thresholds |
Mobile GPS superior |
Map Drawing |
Visual feature creation on base maps |
Site boundaries, excavation areas, transects |
Points, lines, polygons |
Geometry validation |
Requires internet for base maps |
Media Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Take Photo |
Camera capture or gallery selection |
Context photos, artefact images, working shots |
JPEG/PNG |
File size limits |
Compression settings |
File Upload |
Arbitrary file attachment |
PDFs, spreadsheets, audio, video |
Any file type |
Type restrictions possible |
Upload time considerations |
Relationship Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Related Records |
Inter-record connections |
Stratigraphic relationships, sample → context links |
Parent-child or peer |
Required relationships |
Performance degrades >50 relationships |
Display Fields¶
Field Type |
Purpose & Description |
Typical Examples |
Technical Specifications |
Validation Capabilities |
Platform Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rich Text |
Formatted instructional content |
Warnings, procedures, contextual help |
Markdown support |
Not applicable |
Responsive rendering |
Critical Implementation Considerations¶
Human-Readable Identifiers (HRIDs)¶
Whilst technically optional, we strongly recommend implementing HRIDs using Templated String fields for every form. Without HRIDs, the system defaults to opaque UUIDs (e.g., “rec-5f8a9b3c”), substantially complicating data management, export interpretation, and team communication. Configure the hridField property in your viewset to specify which Templated String field serves as the identifier.
Conditional Logic Architecture¶
Fields capable of controlling logic (marked in specifications) can trigger visibility conditions through standardised operators (equal, not-equal, greater-than, less-than). Complex conditions utilise AND/OR combinations. Note that controller fields require the logic_select property or inclusion in conditional_sources for optimal performance.
Platform-Specific Limitations¶
Critical platform disparities require careful consideration:
QR/Barcode scanning functions exclusively on mobile applications
Map fields require internet connectivity for initial tile loading
GPS accuracy varies significantly between mobile devices and browsers
Touch interfaces present challenges for precise selection and text entry
Performance Boundaries¶
Documented performance thresholds inform design decisions:
Relationship fields: Noticeable degradation beyond 50 relationships, unusable beyond 200
Long option lists: Consider hierarchical organisation beyond 20 items
Media synchronisation: Device-specific download toggles essential for photo-intensive notebooks
Complex conditional logic: Multiple controller fields may impact form responsiveness
Validation Limitations¶
Current validation architecture exhibits specific constraints:
No cross-field validation (cannot compare Field A to Field B)
No custom validation functions for project-specific rules
No mathematical operations between fields
No prevention of logical contradictions in relationships
Validation occurs client-side with limited server verification
Export Considerations¶
Each entity type exports as a separate CSV file with relationships preserved through identifier columns. The export format maintains relationship semantics (e.g., “cuts/CTX-042;fills/CTX-043”) but requires manual reconstruction for hierarchical analysis. Design vocabularies and identifiers with post-processing requirements in mind.