10106 results found

1. Box Search Returns Partial-Match Results — Unable to Search for Exact Folder/File Name Only

   Summary: When a user searches for a term in Box that is also a substring of another folder or file name, Box returns both the exact match and the partial matches in the search results. There is currently no way to perform an exact-match-only search in Box, which makes it difficult for users to isolate specific content when similarly named items exist.

   Problem Description: Box search uses partial/substring matching by default. When a user types a search term, Box returns all items whose names contain that term — not just items whose names exactly equal the term. This behavior cannot be overridden by the end user through the UI or any available search syntax.

   Example Scenario: A user has a collaborated folder containing the following two subfolders:

   データ (Data)
   データ移行 (Data Migration)
   When the user searches for "データ", both folders appear in the search results. The user only wants to find the folder named exactly "データ", but there is no way to exclude "データ移行" from the results using Box's current search functionality.

   This is particularly problematic in migration or data management workflows, where users need to precisely identify and act on a specific folder without confusion from similarly named items.

   Summary: When a user searches for a term in Box that is also a substring of another folder or file name, Box returns both the exact match and the partial matches in the search results. There is currently no way to perform an exact-match-only search in Box, which makes it difficult for users to isolate specific content when similarly named items exist.

   Problem Description: Box search uses partial/substring matching by default. When a user types a search term, Box returns all items whose names contain that term — not just items whose names exactly equal the term. This behavior cannot… more

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Search  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

2. IP Address Restriction for Webapp and SELECTED API calls

   We want to enable IP address restrictions only for the web app and selected applications.
   Possible methods include submitting a list of client IDs exempt from restrictions during application, or providing a UI to specify an app list excluded from IP address restrictions.

   Currently, only the following two options are available.
   - Enable only for Webapp
   - Enable for Webapp and All API calls

   What we truly want is to apply IP address restrictions to the web app and BoxDrive. However, selecting “All APIs” renders nearly all other cloud-based integration apps unusable.
   For example, losing integrations that significantly boost productivity—like Salesforce, Zoom, or Box connectors for Zapier and n8n—is a major issue. While we could ask providers for their IP addresses and allowlist them all, maintaining a list of potentially changing IP addresses is impossible.
   Box itself recommends setting rules by domain in its firewall configuration support article, acknowledging IP addresses can change.

   The reason IP address restrictions via SSO cannot solve this is that they cannot prevent scenarios where employees authenticate internally, then take their device outside and access the company Box from an unspecified access point. Box's own IP address restrictions are powerful because they can prevent this, and it is essential to configure them to work alongside various integrations.

   We want to enable IP address restrictions only for the web app and selected applications.
   Possible methods include submitting a list of client IDs exempt from restrictions during application, or providing a UI to specify an app list excluded from IP address restrictions.

   Currently, only the following two options are available.
   - Enable only for Webapp
   - Enable for Webapp and All API calls

   What we truly want is to apply IP address restrictions to the web app and BoxDrive. However, selecting “All APIs” renders nearly all other cloud-based integration apps unusable.
   For example, losing integrations that significantly boost productivity—like… more

   21 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Security  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

3. Request for AI Unit Usage Limits by User and Group

   We would like the ability to control AI Unit consumption at both the user and group levels.
   Currently, AI Unit usage can be difficult to manage across different departments and user types. We would like administrators to be able to:

   Set AI Unit usage limits for individual users
   Set AI Unit usage limits for groups or departments
   Receive alerts when usage approaches configured limits
   Prevent excessive AI Unit consumption and improve cost control

   This enhancement would help organizations govern AI usage more effectively and allocate resources according to business needs.

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box AI  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

4. Loop through folders in a folder, and other lists of IDs/strings in a Box Automate workflow

   hi team. any thoughts on when we'll be able to loop through folders?

   (the ability to loop over files in a folder is good, and would be even better if we could have that within a loop that loops over folders)

   some use cases:

   • customers wanting to process files (i.e. move, rename, MDE) in folder trees, involving multiple levels of folders in the tree, and some but not all folders should be included excluded

   • customers wanting to bulk process folders - e.g. loop through folders in folders in folders, and then move/delete empty folders

   • loop through folders and validate certain metadata attributes, for example, whether the case is closed or open or ongoing, and that would then move the folder to an appropriate archive,

   hi team. any thoughts on when we'll be able to loop through folders?

   (the ability to loop over files in a folder is good, and would be even better if we could have that within a loop that loops over folders)

   some use cases:

   • customers wanting to process files (i.e. move, rename, MDE) in folder trees, involving multiple levels of folders in the tree, and some but not all folders should be included excluded

   • customers wanting to bulk process folders - e.g. loop through folders in folders in folders, and then move/delete empty folders

   • loop through folders and validate certain… more

   •  

   4 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Automate  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

5. Exclude Specific Content from Box AI

   As a law firm we need to segregate certain client data from the ability to use Box AI due to legal agreements in place with their clients to not be able to use AI on their data. Currently we would need to turn off Box AI on the whole account in order to achieve this requirement, which is not ideal.

   138 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   researching  ·  9 comments  ·  Box AI  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

6. Function to disable the display of the login authentication screen for Box for Microsoft Office co-editing features on a per-user basis.

   The following is a request regarding the seamless login feature.
   https://support.box.com/hc/ja/articles/44224534926355

   To avoid displaying the login authentication screen, we understand that enabling the co-editing feature for only certain users in the tenant settings will resolve the issue.
   However, if the number of users enabling or disabling the co-editing feature increases, managing user and group additions or removals through tenant settings each time becomes extremely cumbersome and impractical.
   Implementing this feature enables end users to handle issues immediately on their own, reducing the burden on administrators.

   下記シームレスログイン機能に関する要望です。
   https://support.box.com/hc/ja/articles/44224534926355

   ログイン認証画面を表示させないためには、テナント設定で一部のユーザーにのみ共同編集機能を有効にすれば回避できると認識しています。
   但し、共同編集機能を有効/無効にするユーザーが増えたりした場合に都度テナント設定からの制限ではユーザーやグループの出し入れ等の操作が非常に手間となり現実的ではありません。
   本機能を実装することでエンドユーザー自身で即時に対応できるようになり管理者の負担を減らすことができます。

   21 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box for Office  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

7. Distinguish “Content Access” and “Download” events

   In the User Activity Report (and related activity logs), “Content Access” and “Download” events currently do not clearly distinguish between:
   1) Actions explicitly initiated by an end user, and
   2) Records generated by Box internal processing (e.g., system/background processing, thumbnail generation, programmatic/chunked access, or other non-user-facing operations).
   As a result, admins cannot reliably interpret audit logs for security monitoring, compliance, and incident investigation. False positives or ambiguous records make it difficult to determine what a user actually did.
   Request:
   Please enhance the User Activity Report / activity log records for “Content Access” and “Download” so that user-initiated actions and Box-internal processing can be distinguished. For example:
   - Subdivide event types (e.g., user download vs internal/system access), and/or
   - Add identifiable fields/attributes (e.g., initiator/source type: user action vs internal process; reason/context such as thumbnail generation, chunked content access, automation/app, etc.)
   Why this matters:
   - Accurate audit and compliance reporting
   - Reduced noise in security monitoring and investigations
   - Clearer understanding of true user behavior vs system-generated activity
   We would appreciate any approach that makes these records distinguishable and filterable in reporting/exports (and ideally also in the Events API, if applicable).

   In the User Activity Report (and related activity logs), “Content Access” and “Download” events currently do not clearly distinguish between:
   1) Actions explicitly initiated by an end user, and
   2) Records generated by Box internal processing (e.g., system/background processing, thumbnail generation, programmatic/chunked access, or other non-user-facing operations).
   As a result, admins cannot reliably interpret audit logs for security monitoring, compliance, and incident investigation. False positives or ambiguous records make it difficult to determine what a user actually did.
   Request:
   Please enhance the User Activity Report / activity log records for “Content Access” and “Download” so that user-initiated actions and Box-internal… more

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Admin Reports  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

8. We want users to easily obtain a list of file IDs

   We need a way for users to bulk obtain the ID information of files located in folders for which they have permissions.

   Currently, when users want to check a list of file IDs, they have to contact the Box administrator, who then exports a “Folders and Files Report” and shares it with them. Since there are many such requests, handling them is burdensome.

   Could you add the “Folders and Files Report” to the reports that can be obtained from the Folder Insights screen?

   --
   ユーザーが、アクセス権限を持つフォルダ内にあるファイルのID情報を一括で取得できる方法が必要です。

   現在、ユーザーがファイルIDの一覧を確認したい場合、Box管理者に連絡し、管理者が「フォルダとファイルレポート」をエクスポートして共有してもらう必要があります。このような依頼が多数あるため、その対応に手間がかかっています。

   フォルダとファイルレポートを、フォルダインサイト画面から取得できるレポートの種類として追加していただけませんか。

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Other  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

9. Enforce signer-only access and security controls in Box Sign

   It would be helpful to have the ability to restrict access to Box Sign documents to signers only.

   Currently, additional protections such as password or login can be configured, but access itself is not strictly limited to the intended signers, which may create a risk of unintended access.

   It would be great if admins could enforce signer-only access at the organizational level, ensuring that only designated signers can view the documents sent via Box Sign.

   5 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Sign  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

10. Add a normal Search Bar to Hubs

    The AI is not great. I have written instructions for staff to follow to troubleshoot something. The AI mixes steps and adds incorrect information so that it makes it useless.
    We need a normal Search Bar that can be typed into to find matching key words. It can just have up and down arrows just like "find in page" that allow you to skip through the hub to the related content.

    4 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Box Hubs  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

11. Add folder picker element to Box Forms

    We like the potential use of box forms + doc gen to create documents that share information, but a challenge for us is placing the generated documents in the right end folder. Currently, when filling out a Box Form, there is no way to target any folders in your box environment.

    If you want to use doc gen, you need to specify the final destination folder when you create the relay. Given our folder structure, this is not possible, and it limits cases where we could use this.

    Proposal: Introduce a permission-scoped UI Folder Picker element to Box Forms so that you have access to that folder in Box Automate.

    We like the potential use of box forms + doc gen to create documents that share information, but a challenge for us is placing the generated documents in the right end folder. Currently, when filling out a Box Form, there is no way to target any folders in your box environment.

    If you want to use doc gen, you need to specify the final destination folder when you create the relay. Given our folder structure, this is not possible, and it limits cases where we could use this.

    Proposal: Introduce a permission-scoped UI Folder Picker element to Box Forms so… more

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Forms & Doc Gen  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

12. Feature Request: Add File Size Sorting Option to Box Search Results

    Currently, Box's search results page does not offer the ability to sort results by file size. Users have a need to sort search results by file size, particularly for identifying large files or managing storage. We request the addition of a "File Size (ascending/descending)" sorting option to the search results page.

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Search  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

13. Feature Request: Display Per-Folder Result Count in Box Search

    Currently, Box's search results page does not provide a breakdown of how many files match a search query within each folder. This makes it difficult for users to identify which folders contain the most relevant results and to efficiently locate target files. We request the addition of a feature that categorizes search results by folder and displays the number of hits per folder.

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Search  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

14. Streamline process of adding collaborators to content

    Our users often create their own personal folders and then attempt to share them with their colleagues via shared links. If their colleague has not been added to the file/folder as a collaborator, they will hit a page that says "This shared file or folder has been removed or is unavailable to you." They will then email/message the content owner to request access and/or ask if they have the wrong link. This creates a lot of ad-hoc messages and emails.

    It would be great if there was some kind of real-time notification process wherein the content owner was prompted to extend access to the user who was attempting to access the file (ideally, via pop-up). Or, a button for the user to proactively request access to the content, which would trigger an in-app notification for the content owner.

    Our users often create their own personal folders and then attempt to share them with their colleagues via shared links. If their colleague has not been added to the file/folder as a collaborator, they will hit a page that says "This shared file or folder has been removed or is unavailable to you." They will then email/message the content owner to request access and/or ask if they have the wrong link. This creates a lot of ad-hoc messages and emails.

    It would be great if there was some kind of real-time notification process wherein the content owner was prompted to… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Notifications  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

15. Schedule Retention Policy Disposition Report

    There are several common reporting capabilities which appear to be missing from Retention / Disposition reports:

    1. Ability to name & save a report configuration for future re-use

    2. Ability to schedule a report to be run regularly - Seems like a no-brainer for topics like disposition, which inherently continuously needs review as content falls out of retention

    3. Ability to collaborate individuals on a report so that business stakeholders can review regularly scheduled reports without needing an admin

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Admin Reports  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

16. Request for UI improvement of Box AI for Hubs

    Content: Currently, in Box AI for Hubs responses, sharing reference materials is displayed as a number, which requires a click each time and makes the display difficult to understand.
    　　　　We would like to request improvements to make it easier to access reference materials, such as by changing the subject line instead of the number.

    件名：Box AI for HubsのUI改善要望
    内容：現在Box AI for Hubsの回答で参考資料の共有は番号で表示される為、都度クリックが必要となり、表示がわかりにくいです。
    　　　番号ではなく件名等へ変更する等、参考資料をわかりやすくアクセスできるよう機能改善要望をします。

    28 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    researching  ·  0 comments  ·  Box AI  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. Enable Auto-expiration for Sign Requests inside Box Automate

    Please enable the standard Sign functionality to set an expiration date for a Sign Request when generated inside Box Automate. A nice addition would be to be able to update that expiration through the Sign API after a Sign document is in progress.

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Automate  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

18. Shuttle job specific permissions

    We would like to grant specific individuals the ability to view specific jobs, but not all jobs.

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Shuttle  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

19. Box Automate: Support for “Form Metadata Template”

    When a large number of metadata fields are captured via Forms, mapping each variable to metadata fields within the workflow becomes time-consuming and complex.

    It would be highly beneficial to support applying metadata to files using a “Form Metadata Template,” similar to Relay, to simplify workflow creation.

    formsで入力するメタデータフィールドが多い場合、ワークフロー内でフォームで取得した変数をメタデータフィールドにマッピングするのに手間がかかってしまいます。
    Relayと同様に「Formメタデータテンプレート」を使ってファイルにメタデータを付ける操作もサポートしてほしい。

    5 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Workflow  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

20. Enhance Metadata Input Fields in Box Forms (Multi-line Support & Character Limit)

    [Background and Problem]
    A customer is looking to migrate their FAQ management system from Microsoft Lists to Box. Their plan is to store the FAQ answers as metadata. However, we have received feedback that this is impractical because the metadata input field in Box Forms is restricted to a single line, making it difficult to enter long answers.

    Below are our feature improvement requests.

    1. Multi-line Input Support
       We request the ability to either adjust the height of the text input field for metadata, or to select the same format as the "Long Text" field for metadata fields.

    2. Increased Character Limit (Optional)
       We also have a comment from the customer regarding the character limit for the metadata field in Forms:
       "While 400 characters for Japanese is sufficient for basic needs, it would be even better if it were expanded to around 1,000 characters to allow for more detailed information and broaden its use."

    ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
    【背景と課題】
    現在、Microsoft ListsでFAQ管理を行っている顧客がBoxへの移行を検討しています。 この際、FAQの回答をメタデータに格納する計画ですが、Box Formsのメタデータ入力欄が単一行であるため、「これでは長文の回答が入力できず、実用的ではない」というフィードバックを受けました。

    以下、機能改善のリクエストです。

    1. 入力フィールドの複数行化
       メタデータ用のテキスト入力フィールドの高さを調整できる、または「ロングテキスト」フィールドと同じ形式をメタデータフィールドでも選択できるようにしてほしい。

    2. 入力文字数の拡張　※オプショナル
       Formsのメタデータフィールドに入力できる文字数に関しても、顧客からコメントをいただいております。
       「日本語で400文字あれば最低限の用途では問題ないが、より詳細な情報を記述できるよう、1000文字程度まで拡張されると活用の幅が広がり、さらに良い」

    [Background and Problem]
    A customer is looking to migrate their FAQ management system from Microsoft Lists to Box. Their plan is to store the FAQ answers as metadata. However, we have received feedback that this is impractical because the metadata input field in Box Forms is restricted to a single line, making it difficult to enter long answers.

    Below are our feature improvement requests.

    1. Multi-line Input Support
       We request the ability to either adjust the height of the text input field for metadata, or to select the same format as the "Long Text" field for metadata fields.

    2. Increased Character Limit… more

    21 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    not planned  ·  1 comment  ·  Box Forms & Doc Gen  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating