This was driving me crazy, so I thought I’d pass it along. I’m sure it’s documented somewhere, but I didn’t run across it.
When using Cross-doc to link a table that has references to other tables, make sure that you import the actual base table that is being referenced, not a view on that table.
For example, I had a doc for tracking time (Time Tracker) that has two tables in it: Master Task Table and Master Time Log Table. Those two tables also had various views, for example, Task Kanban View and Time Log Timeline View.
When a developer adds an entry to the Master Time Log Table, it includes a reference to the Master Task Table for the task they are working on.
I have another doc for tracking billing that is not available to the developers. While I was setting that up, I was linking the Master Task Table and the Time Log Timeline View rather than the Master Task Table and the Master Time Log Table.
I imagine there are use cases for linking views rather than the underlying tables, but it seems to be much less common than linking tables. The error message could be much better about this as well.
Table Not Found.
This table does not exist in your doc.
Please sync the table this reference points to.
This is somewhat confusing because “Tables” and “Views” are often used interchangeably within a document, but it turns out that they are quite different things when using Cross Doc. It would be nice if the error message gave the actual name of the Table that is missing and perhaps mentions that it is easy to mistakenly reference a view.
I’ve started the habit of naming tables and views with “Table” and “View” at the end to make it more clear.
This may sound like a minor thing, but it cost me a ton of time in making a complex multi-doc application.