Is Conditional Rendering available on New Record pages?

Conditional rendering happens client side, in real time.  If the data currently in the client side copy of your model meets the condition - the element will render.  If that changes, it will not render.  I have created new pages where a value in Field A controlled the display of Field B (which was right next to it).   The page opens in edit mode and Field A is blank and Field B is not displayed.  After typing a value in Field A that meets the criteria - field B is immediately displayed.  There is a calculation gap before the field displays, but Tab out, or save, or reload is not required. 

Make sure both fields are in your model, and that the render condition statement is correct. 

Its pretty cool stuff. 

Yes you should be able to render different areas based on the new Account’s RecordTypeId field, as long as the “RecordTypeId” field is in your Model. .

Do I have to create a VF page to house the Skuid page before testing this, or should I be able to test this from the Preview?

You can test this just from Preview.

OK, I created a new page for Account New Record, using the New Record template. I added RecordType to the model. I added RecordType to the Field Editor. I changed the Render mode to Picklist I then created a new Field Editor with other fields, and a Render condition which asserts RecordTypeID = individual value (012i0000000n4OQ) . The field editor does not render.

The Record Type . Name value has spaces in it, but as a label I don’t think that should matter.

I got another picklist to successfully serve as the Render Condition, just not record type ID. Maybe it wants the 18 digit code instead of the 15?

Yes, that was definitely the answer!! The condition required the 18 digit value. Any chance you could support both?

We do need to support the reference field name as well.  We’ll consider this a bug.  Thanks for your diligence in testing this out. 

The Label , 15 Digit ID and the 18 Digit ID would be AWESOME. Thanks for the response, Jacob

I know this thread is a few months old, but I just ran into this same issue - having support for using the record type’s name would be great! Any idea on when it might be added?