• Provide an out of the box facility via the web interface to allow users to make selections to modify the formatting rather than having to generate the JSON themselves.


• Allow the JSON to be specified with a file reference rather than having to put the code directly in a field. (See also user voice entry: Allow View Formatting to reference external file, https://sharepoint.uservoice.com/forums/329214-sites-and-collaboration/suggestions/35836723-allow-vi...).


• Prompt for updating view formatting JSON when someone with appropriate rights changes the display width of a field.


• Allow the Name field for a document to be formatted via view formatting and improve the formatting capabilities via column formatting (some things can be done using @currentField)


• Allow comments in JSON used for formatting (or at least provide tools to limit VS Code to allow only what SharePoint JSON formatting allows)


• Display an indicator on the list or library Settings page for each column that has column formatting set.


• Provide JSON formatting controls to modify grouping display.


• Support automatic redrawing as items update in list and library web parts.


• Add custom date formats and date parts.


• Enhance string operations.


• Support formatting of rich text.

As Microsoft increasingly supports tailored experiences, we need the ability to operate as a user with equivalent or fewer credentials, including just not being the person who added information.

For example, a site owner who made updates to a site is seeing Updated Pages (with explicit pages underneath) in the left navigation, but has no rights to remove the navigation and didn't realize that other people weren't seeing those pages.

Another case was where the SCA had no issue opening a document with embedded documents, but it would not open for site owners and contributors.

In our on-prem environment, I was able to use a test account and assign it with certain rights to verify that those users were going to get the experience I intended, and I was able to do that with a test account. In the SharePoint Online world, for an out-of-the-box solution I'd need a second licensed account for testing in production.

Checking permissions to a site, list, library or item helps, but just isn't enough for testing the experience on a page in or in a solution.

A potential way to implement this would be to allow me to click on the name I'm logged in as, and in addition to About Me, Sign Out and Personalize this Page, have an option to impersonate a specific user (who has fewer or equivalent rights to me) or a certain level of rights (equivalent to or less than the rights I have).

Some developers in teams help test each other's solutions, changing who has what rights, but for those of us who largely work independently, we don't have that luxury.

Currently SharePoint returns https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/X-Frame-Options header when trying to embed (with <frame>, <iframe>, <object>, <embed>) documents from external websites. The header is set to "sameorigin" that simply means only pages hosted on .sharepoint.com domain can do that.

So let's see below example:
1. Company XYZ has an internal domain: xyz.com. Company is using SharePoint and stores documents e.g.: pdf's there.
2. Company XYZ has an internal technical portal: portal.xzy.com and want's to s embed documents from SharePoint.
3. Because of X-Frame-Options returned along for any pdf/doc/xls etc document #2 is impossible as web browsers will not allow to do this kind of embedding.

There are modern alternatives that can be used instead of old X-Frame-Options header.
For instance the Content-Security-Policy header, which along many other policies can white-list what URLs are allowed to host SharePoint page/resources/files in a frame, using the frame-ancestors directive. frame-ancestors supports multiple domains and even wildcards, for example:

Content-Security-Policy: frame-ancestors 'self' *.sabre.com;

The HTTP Content-Security-Policy (CSP) frame-ancestors directive specifies valid parents that may embed a page using <frame>, <iframe>, <object>, <embed>, or <applet>.

Therefore, SharePoint site administrator should have an ability to configure domains that the documents can be loaded from.

When creating a sub site under a modern communication site or group connected team sites, see options to select "Team Site (classic experience), Blog, Project Site, Community Sit", and these all are classic site templates.
If the root site (communication site) is customized with modern features like, Theme (for corporate branding), Hub site, Hub site navigation, SPFx Application customizer, the sub site created with classic templates fails to render the above modern features. And it is difficult to navigate to other sites from the classic site.
Either stop showing such classic site templates except (Team site (no Office 365 group)) option under “Template Selection” or provide an option to configure what site templates are allowed (the way the classic publishing sites shows under Settings  Look and Feel  Page layouts and Site templates (/_layouts/15/AreaTemplatesettings.aspx) page.
We can not control the user not to select classic site templates, and it causes non-uniform branding on corporate intranet portal sites, and users will not enjoy the benefits of modern features such as modern themes, hub sites, and navigation.

If you create a Word document and save it (from within Word) to a document library in SharePoint that has required columns, Word will first show a yellow warning in the notification bar, indicating that required properties need to be filled in before saving and then show the SharePoint properties on the right hand side of the document (the new Document Information Panel). No SharePoint properties are however shown in the form. If all the columns are optional, you will be able to fill them in by clicking on the "Properties" icon in the Ribbon's "View" tab.
By clicking on Word's "File" tab, the mandatory columns will however be able to be updated, but this requires quite a lot of clicks and is not very intuitive and user friendly.