New element type: Signature

Figma: Questions: I'm trying to map out what we want the MVP to do. So normal flow is: you add a new element type in canvas called Signature, you can mark it as required or not Then in the style editor you can probably style the label and description. For the signature block itself, do we want to introduce any properties in style editor? I see in the figma we have background, radius, border and shadows. I'm not sure if we want to let them change the background, because all signatures are usually black on white. In the form itself, you'll be able to draw a signature. Then in responses: we show Signature in the details view and also in export. I'm thinking to have a column in table Signature that has a checkmark for yes or empty, and then in details and export we show the png of the actual signtarue Now, I see some comments where it gets a bit unclear: You say in one comment that it should work for pencils on tablets, that's fine Then you say to have security for legal docs, what does that mean? The other point is the design with 2 signatures. I would recommend keeping this out of the MVP, because it can get tricky, or I don't understand the use-case exactly. Let's say we have a doc where we want 2 people to sign. How would the form work, because we don't have any journeys where you can share your form answers with somebody so somebody else would complete just the signature. Or the 2 signatures to be the use-case of owner signature + customer signature. In this case, the form owner can configure his in canvas somewhere or somewhere in user-settings and to have a toggle in canvas settings for double signature and in customer form to show the owner signature already? So the customer can see it's double signed? Jason's answers: Id leave the BG on this one FOR now, if we need more later we can add it. Users may have a black form and a white block on black woul;d be weird. but later problem re form journeys, i know we don't have this, good to index, being able to share the form journey has been requested a lot but it's not nearly as much as just regular e-sigs OR payments so it can be indexed into an idea, if we need to do later okay. i think we just leave the double sig - its gonna require an almost "shared" version of the form where two people might see a form and be able to answer it but be tied to one response. so you might have signer and signee later, but a future problem Legal wise, I did an analysis on this: Jason's feedback: can we just use a fineprint under signiture box" i agree to xxx" seems like if we wanna be serious we may need the QES eventually, but i do again think thats a later thing IF we get enough traction for it im happy with the MVP solution, i dont think we need a fully advanced version YET