Share Your Thoughts

Restrict copy, share and exportI really appreciate this feature, as it enhances security for our assets and solutions, which management values. However, the current grouping of the ‘Copy,’ ‘Share,’ and ‘Download’ options is causing some workflow challenges:Project managers unable to download frames for stakeholder presentations Developers unable to download assets they needSeparating these options would allow for better control while maintaining security.Would it be possible to adjust this to ensure smoother workflows for different roles?Thanks 😄

 This is currently the brightest page on the entire internet. It’s somehow brighter than Gmail. Come on! 

The tool appeared with all my acquaintances of designers, but I do not have it. How long to wait? He submitted an application to Beta. Updates are set by the latter

Hello, my prototype contains a set of three cards representing three scenarios. Each has a string variable for label, description, type and ID and there is a mode for each scenario. They also all contain two other string variables which can be changed by selecting values from a dropdown, but the same value is shown all three modes. For some reason those variables can only be changed for the default mode. So I was wondering if I can set them for the other modes somehow? Or is that not how modes are supposed to be used? Cheers, Chris.

Hello!! Sometimes, it's necessary to consolidate several design files, as different files contain varying flows. However, the section remains the same. When a project has many files, locating the specific flows for one section can be challenging.Example 

Dear Figma Team,I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to request the implementation of a new feature that would significantly improve the filtering capabilities within Figma's file history.Currently, the file history provides a useful overview of changes made to a file over time. However, I believe there is an opportunity to make this feature even more powerful and efficient by introducing additional filtering options.Specifically, I would like to propose the ability to filter file history entries not only by the user who made the changes, but also by the type of modification. For example, it would be incredibly helpful to be able to quickly identify all the "additions" made to a file, as well as any "dev mode" or other specialized changes.Furthermore, I suggest allowing users to filter file history based on other users who have interacted with the file. This would enable us to easily track the collaborative efforts and contributions of the entire team, rather than just our

I’ve given view access to files to a lot of stakeholders, and we’ve recently found that a lot of old, resolved comments between the design team have been reopened. We’re also now wondering if any have been closed without us knowing!As we use the comments to track our ideas and to-dos in situ, it would be beneficial to know who is closing and reopening these (like what you’d see in Google Docs, for example) so that we can track activity and also speak to anyone who might be doing this erroneously. 

When one of my design system assets is invalid, it’s barely visible at the moment of publishing that it’s invalid and it will usually take me a few minutes to notice what’s wrong since it doesn’t look any different from usual publishing at first glance. Having a warning that’s highlighted and look different from usual on the publishing modal would help a lot. Thank you!

Hi! Long time listener, first time caller – I have a small detail quality-of-life suggestion: Currently:Arrowheads currently adopt the angle of the point at which they connect to the line. This often leads to arrows being “ugly”, due to big variations in the optical spacing between arrow head ends, and the line with which they are connected.Proposal:Make the arrowheads “aware of what was before the final point of the line”, and adjust the angle of the arrowhead so that the optical alignment becomes a bit nicer. I don’t know exactly what math magic is needed for this, but I’m sure more smart people than me can work it out, if you agree with the issue.Thanks, take care! 🙌 Example of the current arrowhead implementation in the first row, and my proposal (with nicer optical alignment) in the second row. 

Hi, Is there any option to select specific characters in multiple text fields? For example I have to change every “a” character to be blue. I know I can use Find and Replace to find the characters, but I have to go one by one to change the color. If you have any idea how might i do it, please let me know 🙂 Thanks in advance

Would love post its to stick to the different elements in the page, kinda like Comments are tied to an element which has a comment assigned to it.

As per the last update, when closed captions are activated while starting a conversation, the popover that comes up showing the captions has a very small width value, making the text unreadable and it cannot be resized unfortunately.It would be great to also drag around the window so it can placed anywhere on the screen just as other Figma modals.  

When I’m in the Prototype dialog (see attached screenshot) and want to select a Frame to navigate to, the menu that pops up truncates the names of top-level frames. It would make my life simpler if this menu auto-sized its width so I could see the entire name of all top-level frames on the page as I use a naming system that is quite lengthy, but useful to me.

Other website builder are really bad and the UI designed in Figma cannot be implemented of those builder so . I think a Figma website builder with all the Figma features would be really nice

 Could you make these two icons slightly different?I know I can unpack the ASAR and edit the tray icons manually, but it would be great if they were distinct by default.Thanks!

When you create a new document, you cannot currently add it to a new folder or project directly from that file. You have to return to the home screen then create the new project, THEN add it. It would be much more intuitive to add the folder when organising the file from… The file itself.

When designing components, variants may exist that are optimised for different breakpoints, or parent frame dimensions (e.g. a search icon when space is limited, but a search icon+textfield when more spacious)Within an enterprise, it is difficult to communicate the rules around the variant styles to use, and then ensure they are being adhered to.Could max-min widths be set on components, so that when used in designs, the instance automatically show the correct variant.Ideally this would have some enterprise governance, so that in some cases, the designer can over-ride the variant used, and in other cases, can’t. 

The new responsive prototyping tool allows prototypes to show one single layout, within the min & max constraints set.However, it is usual to design other layouts for other breakpoints.I’d like layouts to be linked - so that the prototype fully adapts, and switched layouts as the screen gets wider/narrower (or shorter/taller if desired).My ideas are there’s two ways this could be made easyBy using a naming convention of screens. Eg. Layout 0px, Layout 720px, Layout 1400px By linking the screens in the prototyping settings E.g. Instead of setting ‘Click’, you could choose ‘Screen width’ and set the width when to switch to the new layout

Hi!I would like to add a tag to the components in the design system library.Normally, all the components we have in Figma are also developed. However, in some cases, we create components specifically to facilitate the design team's work, even though they are not part of the design system as developed components.Instead of separating these complementary components into a separate library, our idea is to maintain a single library so that designers can access all resources from one place.Here as an example of the idea.I hope it can help more teams.  

Hello, I’m generally pretty chill about product updates, and I understand that companies need to evolve and improve their features Figma included. But honestly, I think you're heading in the wrong direction when it comes to prioritisation.Obviously, us the users don’t get insight into your development plans until changes are released. But I urge you to reconsider your product roadmap in terms of real, tangible benefits for designers.We’re the ones paying you after all…The new UI3 update introduces several changes that just don’t align with fundamental design principles. Since the rise of tools like Photoshop in the 1990s, there has been an industry standard in layout alignments, UI iconography, and UX best practices. Disrupting these conventions for the sake of change feels counterproductive.I understand the ambition to create the best possible software, but some of these decisions feel like change for change’s sake. With UI3, it genuinely feels like I’m driving in reverse, dealing wit

ContextMy company heavily uses Figma variables and are looking to build out multiple collections each having a unique set of modes. One example would be around Buttons—two collections would be made, one for states and another for size. There would be many other collections that would need to be created to create a comprehensive design system. Caveat: This use case may be an edge case or unique to me.ProblemThe current variable window is very inflexible:Can’t view your list of collections outside of a dropdown feels clunky Can’t resize the left panel with the list of variables Can’t reorder modes (I may be missing something here on why that is built that way)SuggestionsWould be nice to treat the variables’ left panel like the main pages and layer panels Collections could be treated like pages and would be housed in a resizable section above the variables which would be treated like the layers The same way we interact with the pages and layers panels would be the same way we interact wit

Not sure if this has been been covered so apologises if it has! I did search but couldn’t find anything.We are manufacturing our own product/device and I use Figma for prototyping the screens that go onto it. To give a better visual presentation to stakeholders within the company I work for, it would be useful to be able to upload our device image (as a png with the screen removed) so when I show UX/UI flows with prototyping they get a better sense of what it looks like in situ on our product/device.  

Suggestion for the Ask the Community Forum:I've come across multiple threads where users faced similar issues, but by the time I found them, the discussions were already closed. This wastes valuable time when troubleshooting quick issues.I get that storing excessive information isn't ideal, and many problems do repeat. However, Figma is used by a diverse global audience with varying English proficiency, professional backgrounds, and software literacy. What seems like an "obvious" question might not be so obvious to everyone.Would it be possible to keep threads open for a set amount of time before closing or removing them? This could help more users find solutions efficiently.

I want to connect variables with my sizes (e.g. 2.9, 3.9,0.2) to the scaling feature. Is there any workaround right know or a plan to integrate this feature?