starred/documenso

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/documenso/documenso.git synced 2026-04-25 05:46:01 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #2329] Add invisible label/identifier to Radio + Checkbox Fields for easier API access #659

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-26 18:47:57 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-26 18:47:57 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @alexschnebel on GitHub (Dec 16, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/documenso/documenso/issues/2329

Describe the improvement you are suggesting in detail

We currently face the problem that we can't differentiate Radio and Checkbox fields through the API. We have complicated (rather tedious) forms we'd like to pre-fill through the API, but can't distinguish radio buttons that have simple "yes", "no" options. Because there are multiple of such "yes", "no" radio buttons, they all look the same in the API envelope response.

We've noticed that the API returns a "label" similar to the other fields. Would be really nice if we could utilize the label to give the radio/checkboxes a unique identifier, so we can then pre-fill the correct fields. Alternatively we would also suggest to add a new field called ¨id" or similar to distinguish them through the API later on.

Additional Information & Alternatives (optional)

No response

Do you want to work on this improvement?

Yes

Please check the boxes that apply to this improvement suggestion.

I have searched the existing issues and improvement suggestions to avoid duplication.
I have provided a clear description of the improvement being suggested.
I have explained the rationale behind this improvement.
I have included any relevant technical details or design suggestions.
I understand that this is a suggestion and that there is no guarantee of implementation.

Originally created by @alexschnebel on GitHub (Dec 16, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/documenso/documenso/issues/2329 ### Describe the improvement you are suggesting in detail We currently face the problem that we can't differentiate Radio and Checkbox fields through the API. We have complicated (rather tedious) forms we'd like to pre-fill through the API, but can't distinguish radio buttons that have simple "yes", "no" options. Because there are multiple of such "yes", "no" radio buttons, they all look the same in the API envelope response. We've noticed that the API returns a "label" similar to the other fields. Would be really nice if we could utilize the label to give the radio/checkboxes a unique identifier, so we can then pre-fill the correct fields. Alternatively we would also suggest to add a new field called ¨id" or similar to distinguish them through the API later on. ### Additional Information & Alternatives (optional) _No response_ ### Do you want to work on this improvement? Yes ### Please check the boxes that apply to this improvement suggestion. - [x] I have searched the existing issues and improvement suggestions to avoid duplication. - [x] I have provided a clear description of the improvement being suggested. - [x] I have explained the rationale behind this improvement. - [x] I have included any relevant technical details or design suggestions. - [x] I understand that this is a suggestion and that there is no guarantee of implementation.

kerem added the

status: triage

label

2026-02-26 18:47:57 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-26 18:47:57 +03:00

Author

Owner

@coderabbitai[bot] commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2025):

📝 CodeRabbit Plan Mode

Generate an implementation plan and prompts that you can use with your favorite coding agent.

Create Plan

Examples

_{You can configure auto-planning by selecting labels in the issue_enrichment configuration.}

🔗 Similar Issues

Related Issues

👤 Suggested Assignees

🧪 Issue enrichment is currently in early access.

To disable automatic issue enrichment, add the following to your .coderabbit.yaml:

issue_enrichment:
  auto_enrich:
    enabled: false

@coderabbitai[bot] commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2025):  ## 📝 CodeRabbit Plan Mode Generate an implementation plan and prompts that you can use with your favorite coding agent. - [ ]  Create Plan <details> <summary>Examples</summary> - [Example 1](https://github.com/coderabbitai/git-worktree-runner/issues/29#issuecomment-3589134556) - [Example 2](https://github.com/coderabbitai/git-worktree-runner/issues/12#issuecomment-3606665167) </details> <sub>You can configure auto-planning by selecting labels in the issue_enrichment configuration.</sub> ## 🔗 Similar Issues **Related Issues** - https://github.com/documenso/documenso/issues/2141 - https://github.com/documenso/documenso/issues/1708 - https://github.com/documenso/documenso/issues/1621 - https://github.com/documenso/documenso/issues/1552 ## 👤 Suggested Assignees - [NDCallahan](https://github.com/NDCallahan) - [ASchmidt84](https://github.com/ASchmidt84) - [DesignSkeptic](https://github.com/DesignSkeptic) - [Reberg](https://github.com/Reberg) --- <details> <summary> 🧪 Issue enrichment is currently in early access.</summary> To disable automatic issue enrichment, add the following to your `.coderabbit.yaml`: ```yaml issue_enrichment: auto_enrich: enabled: false ``` </details>

kerem commented

2026-02-26 18:47:57 +03:00

Author

Owner

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2025):

Thank you for opening your first issue and for being a part of the open signing revolution!

One of our team members will review it and get back to you as soon as it possible 💚

Meanwhile, please feel free to hop into our community in Discord

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2025): Thank you for opening your first issue and for being a part of the open signing revolution! <br /> One of our team members will review it and get back to you as soon as it possible 💚 <br /> Meanwhile, please feel free to hop into our community in [Discord](https://documen.so/discord)

kerem commented

2026-02-26 18:47:57 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ropelletier commented on GitHub (Feb 17, 2026):

I just want to second this request, for all fields. Having some kind o unique id for each field would be very useful for processing api webhooks.

@ropelletier commented on GitHub (Feb 17, 2026): I just want to second this request, for all fields. Having some kind o unique id for each field would be very useful for processing api webhooks.

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

starred/documenso#659

No description provided.

Rows
Columns