Share Your Thoughts

It’d help to add “Scroll Behavior” option for the items in auto layout, which gives the option for Position Sticky either for Top or Left (with offset values) depending on the direction of auto layout (vertical or horizontal). This will make creating tabular / grid layouts with row and column freezes possible… especially when creating feature comparison layouts.

I’d like to request a new feature that provides more control over sharing permissions for viewers and Dev Mode users. Current Challenge:In our organization, we have internal employees and external agencies set as viewers, and we also use Dev Mode on an organization plan, where developers are automatically set as viewers as well. However, the sharing permissions for both viewers and Dev Mode users are currently bundled under the same settings. This causes issues because we need different levels of access control: Some viewers should be able to export files.Some viewers should be able to copy and share screen designs.Some viewers should only be able to view without any additional permissions.Feature Request:Could you introduce more refined sharing permissions that allow us to control these settings separately? Specifically, having distinct options for:😎 Viewers who can export files.😎 Viewers who can copy and share designs.😎 Viewers who can only view.😎 Dev Mode users with separate per

I’d like to request a new feature that provides more control over sharing permissions for viewers and Dev Mode users.Current Challenge:In our organization, we have internal employees and external agencies set as viewers, and we also use Dev Mode on an organization plan, where developers are automatically set as viewers as well. However, the sharing permissions for both viewers and Dev Mode users are currently bundled under the same settings.This causes issues because we need different levels of access control:Some viewers should be able to export files. Some viewers should be able to copy and share screen designs. Some viewers should only be able to view without any additional permissions.Feature Request:Could you introduce more refined sharing permissions that allow us to control these settings separately? Specifically, having distinct options for:😎 Viewers who can export files.😎 Viewers who can copy and share designs.😎 Viewers who can only view.😎 Dev Mode users with separate perm

Can Figma create a feature when we click a link in Figma that navigate to the design page, then will appear "Return to Link" like "Return to Instance" in component feature? 

 The User Enter Page Manual helps us navigate any page.  

I like shortcuts, but… Some Figma shortcuts override my keyboard layout shortcuts. For example:“OPT+<” or “OPT+>” to insert quotes like this « ». But in Figma its letter spacing controls. “SHIFT+OPT+<” or “SHIFT+OPT+>” to insert quotes like this „ “. But its line-height.Those shortcuts frustrate me, so I want to disable it. Other ones are quite nice.

Make it possible to download comments in the same way as local versions of files are downloaded, with the ability to also import comments along with a local file, now I transfer all comments from one file to another manually, also between pages in files, this is very inconvenient, and does not simplify the task

While I can link width and height to variables, it can be hard to get complex components to scale correctly using them. Having a scale variable that behaves just like using the K key would make things a lot easier. Unlike using the K key it would need to remember the ‘base’ 1.0 scale of an object.

Would be extremely helpful to have the option to always show min-w and max-w in the sizing panel! Selecting the dropdown takes forever. Thanks!

If you copy anything as a PNG, it defaults to 2X size. The problem I’m running into is that I’m copy screenshots from Figma into other tools like Axure all day long. Since “Copy as PNG” only copies at 2X, I’m constantly needing to group objects and create export settings unnecessarily over and over.I’m hoping for one of these solutions somewhere. Ability to “Copy as PNG 1x” with the existing “Copy as PNG 2x” Ability to choose a preference for “Copy” options Ability to respect the export settings of the parent frame when copying children (so I don’t have to recreate export settings repeatedly)Does anyone know if any of these are on the product roadmap to address? Or if something exists that I just haven’t found. I’ve seen this issue come up in forums a few times. Thanks for any help or tips anyone might have.

Hi, Updating components slows down the inability to browse other components from the open review detail of a component. I would also expect the possibility of browsing components in the detail.     Furthermore, if I update all instances, a button to move to the next component appears. However, it does not behave in such a way that it moves to the next component, but to the first, which is strange. An example of use is if, for example, I have the first component in the change list, where there are 300 occurrences, but I want to skip it at the moment, I go to the detail of the second component, update it, but then I have to go back and deal with the second component again.     I would like to see a button "Update all in this change/push/..." in the list of component changes. Now I can only update components one by one or all at once.       Thank you for checking the comment and I would be pleased if some (or all :-)) of them were implemented and I discovered them in one of the next versi

I request the removal of the “Help” question button in the inspector panel. It is intrusive, persistent, and annoying, similar to a pinned chat agent that obscures relevant information. It is also redundant since help is available in the toolbar menu. Please remove that button; it’s driving me crazy!

It would be great to be able to add a note when declining someone of Figma access, so I wouldn’t have to write separate email with explanation of decline decision. 

It would be convenient if we could inherit the code syntax from a referenced variable. It makes sense that the variable codeSyntax is interpreted out of the box, but it would be very convenient to inherit referenced variables in some scenarios. We have a variable collections for designers to control color from a matrix using variable mode. When inspecting the variables in use it would only output --background, --text because this is the name of the variable, but in reality these variables reference variables with other names and codeSyntax. These variables would look something like this:--ds-color-accent-background, --ds-color-neutral-background. This would also be the variable used in code. Whats your thoughts on this? 

Is there a way to create variables for axes like width, grade, and slant? Or is the new typography variable support currently limited to the following: → Font family → Font weight and style → Font size → Line height → Letter spacing → Paragraph spacing and indent

Currently, if you would like to bold part a text using a certain style, you have to create an extra style with a different font-weight, then jump into text styles and pick a bolded one. Things get crazier if we would like italic, underline, strikethrough as well… 🤯 Fine. But this is not how coding works (something you’re trying to align to). Usually*, we can just mark part of a text in styled with only font-weight property. Something similar is required in Figma with the ability to assign shortcuts so we can easily use i.e. ctrl+B / cmd+B to assign bolded sub-style. Just like all your users work with text in any other software. Optionally, these could be just pre-made options to pick (bold, italic, underline, strikethrough). *I’m a designer not engineer though

I have noticed that it is not possible to assign specific variables from a component to the internal components that make it up. For example, in a component composed of multiple internal components, you cannot assign a text variable from the main component to its subcomponents. This creates an issue when a property, such as a text variable, needs to be changed in multiple places simultaneously, as it must be manually updated in each internal component.It would be ideal if the system allowed assigning specific variables from a component to its internal components to streamline the management and editing of shared properties.

Record Prototype | A feature I wish existed in Figma 🎥. Adobe XD released this many years ago and had the time to die before it even existed in Figma. 🤷‍♂️. So, what’s stopping Figma from doing it?

We constantly do a lot of routine work and we often have to change the parameters of shapes, texts, etc. This is especially true if we need to apply the same operations on different objects. I suggest, instead of clicking on the panels or navigating menus, use a key combination that will repeat the last successful action. Here is video example Another video Would you use a function like this?

It would be cool to set a numerical property type for elements within components. List based components (i.e. tabs, table of contents, etc.) are the primary use case I can think of, but there are probably others. Having the ability to increase/decrease the number of items within a component instance (using a number counter type input or something), would be a great alternative to building the components with random/maximum number of nested elements, and then hiding layers—or nesting a series of numerical variants, or some other alternative.

When using the color picker, if the object you’re picking from has a color style applied, the color picker doesn’t apply that style to the selected object — it just applies the hex value (or whatever color model you have set) of the pixel you click. This can lead to messy colors not adhering to your style guide. Instead, the color picker should apply the color style of the clicked object if it has one. (You could click the stroke to apply the stroke’s color style, or the fill to apply the fill’s color style.) If you do want to be able to pick the pixel color instead of the style, there could be an additional modifier key to hold while clicking. With the current functionality, if you want to apply the same color style to another object, you first have to click the already-styled object to see what style is applied (assuming you may have multiple similar shades and can’t eyeball it), then click the object you want to style, and then find that color style in the list and apply it. The pro

Our design system devs asked us designers for a better way to compare changes within our component specs between updates.  We stage our components as instances in a separate spec file from the library file the components are published from.  Each component and variant is contained within an individual section acting as a wrapper.  The wrapper is where we enable a “ready for dev” tag to capture a version history.  Using this method we’ve run into a few obstacles: Sections don’t capture granular changes, we’ve had to switch from wrapping our component instances in sections to frames for a version history to be recorded within the compare/diff window. Ready for dev version history can only be viewed by first entering dev mode, then entering focus view on the versioned frame (it doesn’t show if you enter focus view from design mode). `Compare changes` within the standard dev mode view does not show this information and instead compares against the original component or shows version histor

Dear Figma Team,I would like to provide feedback regarding the behavior of stroke and padding when exporting designs for CSS implementation. While Figma offers excellent design tools and helpful CSS hints, there is a notable inconsistency between how strokes are visually represented in Figma and how they translate into CSS code. This discrepancy can lead to confusion and extra work during the development process.Issue DescriptionWhen designing input fields in Figma, strokes (borders) are measured separately from padding, and padding is displayed as starting from the outer edge of the element's frame. However, when exporting to CSS or implementing designs manually, borders are treated differently due to the CSS box model: In CSS, padding is measured from the inner edge of the border (stroke). Figma suggests using box-sizing: border-box for correct border inclusion in dimensions, but it does not account for the fact that stroke thickness affects the visual padding. Example ScenarioIn m

Context: In Figma Design file, setting padding requires adjusting both sides (top +bottom, right+ left). While having the ability to combine longitudinal sides as one and latitudinal sides as another is helpful - it still requires to insert the same number two times(individually) for the times when the padding is same for all 4 sides for anything, which can be time-consuming and frustrating.Idea-suggestion: Introduce an option to apply equal padding to all sides with a single input, streamlining the process and improving efficiency.