Description - Add a sort feature to allow proof participants to see comments on a proof to appear in order from the top of the page to the bottom of the page Why is this feature important to you - Our users may go back into proofs to add comments or go back to prior pages to add comments. Right now proof participants can see comments per page but they are in order of entry (either from oldest to newest or newest to oldest) but not in order on how they appear on the page. This can affect how Studio implements the changes. How would you like the feature to work - I would like there to be an option to filter comments by page and then a sort feature to put them in order as they appear on the page like how comments appear in an Adobe Acrobat PDF Current Behaviour - The comments can bounce around from the top to the bottom back to the top and back to the bottom of the page based on when they were entered instead of aligning them in order from top to bottom on the page
Description - There is little indication within AEP and CJA as to what fields (persistent ID and transient ID) in the stitched dataset were used to create the stitchedID column. Why is this feature important to you - It would be help the info be easily accessible by being able to check the schema (or CJA component's description) and to act as some form of documentation for what was used in the stitching provisioning for IDs. Especially in the long term, there may be turnover and the main CJA stakeholder on the customer side may be different than when CJA was first implemented. How would you like the feature to work - The description for the stitchedID field that gets created during stitching provisioning defaulting to list what the persistent and transient IDs used were. Current Behaviour - Stitched ID field's description defaults to just "Stitched ID"
Description - Allow for the addition or removal of header fields on the Program object within layout templates. This functionality is currently available for the project, task, and issue objects. Why is this feature important to you - Since some of the standard fields that appear in this section on each program are not always accurate or aligned with how we do our calculations, when we're showing a client a program (weekly status meeting), we don't want to cause confusion for our clients. How would you like the feature to work - Allow admins to add/remove program fields from the field header section in layout templates Current Behaviour - System doesn't allow you to add/remove field headers for the program object
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I suggest to have a PNG option for the FPO setting slider to enable a seamless working with assets that do rely on transparency. Use-case: FPO Renditions for InDesign Asset Link are OOTB only available as JPGs.This file format does not meet the needs of modern print media production workflows, since images rely more heavily on transparency settings instead of cutting paths. This change is not very new and i have seen companies made that switch from cutting paths to transparency back in 2010. This makes JPG a suboptimal choice for FPO renditions since this format is not capable of containing transparent pixels. The picture would be flattened on a white background. Current/Experienced Behavior: FPO is simply not an option on every asset that has a transparent background. This goes for pretty much every single product picture within our AEM.Since the setting is applied via Folder setting, we have to manualy delete the FPO renditions on assets that need its inbuilt transparency to be able to layout correctly in InDesign (since JPG does not hold any transparency) and to make things worse - this increases the loading time significantly for bigger print media cataloges, since InDesign will load the orignal files into the cache every time the user checks out the cataloge. We are talking 10Gig every single checkout.To make the FPO a good thing - it needs to have more options than just JPG. Improved/Expected Behavior: Give users more than just JPG as a FPO format. I suggest PNGalpha since it would meet the transparency criteria, yet there might be some additional things i don't have on my radar. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS 2023.12.14697.20231215T125030Z Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Currently when applying filters, filters should be selected individually (filter select -> result loads -> and another select another filter and so on). This takes a lot of effort and time lag. Use-case: Place apply all button to select all filters at once Current/Experienced Behavior: Filters applied individually Improved/Expected Behavior: Apply all button to select all filters Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Asset CS Customer-name/Organization name: LG Electronics Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Assurance Logo physical position fix on the screenWhy is this feature important to you - It appears at top left corner and is hindering with elements that are clickable How would you like the feature to work - It should be retractable when cursor is moved on top of logo so that item beneath can be clicked.Current Behavior - It blocks the button below it and makes it unclickable.
It would be nice to have the ability to bulk change the owner of a report or calendar instead of having to make a copy so it will rename who owns it. We just had our main system admin leave who set up the system years ago and having a bulk feature to remove her name and add another Admin would be so beneficial.
Ability to view comments that were initially on a pdf document before uploading into Workfront. You are able to view the comments when uploading pdf as a document; however, when converting into a proof or using the pdf to create a proof initially, you do not get to see any of the comments (only the marks on the document itself) To add this feature would be awesome to resolve since most of us deal with external partners that don't have any sort of management system to comment on assets and rely on Adobe Acrobat to include comments and edit changesAfter all, Adobe now owns Workfront so it would be in their best interest to have their product work exclusively within any of their other systems :)
Description - Everybody loves a good line chart. With line charts, you can easily see numbers, but on a line! It's amazing! But I think it could be even more amazing. In many Analysis Workspace projects, I see some sort of line chart for top-level metrics and trends, like this one: Now, depending on how our stakeholders would use this project, they might want to change the granularity of the chart to reflect longer-running campaigns, sudden traffic increases, and many more use cases. To do that, they currently have two options: Find the connected Freeform table, drag and drop a new granularity in there, and hope it doesn't go wrong OR do it directly on the chart by (finding and) clicking the little gear icon: Now, while those methods work well enough once you a) know where to find the option and b) remember where it is hidden, we might have an opportunity here to make it just a bit easier for people to play with granularities, especially if they only use Workspace every now and then. To achieve that, I proudly propose to you: The same, but slightly different: Now, we have a quickly accessible, not-scary, simple-to-understand way to change granularities without having to find the gear icon or any drag and drop. Amazing! All it needs is this little group of buttons (or, for the cool kids, a Coral.ButtonGroup) that might only show up when hovering over the chart and possibly can be hidden entirely from the gear box. And, as we all know: Fewer clicks always mean higher adoption, so this might be an easy win! Why is this feature important to you - Because I want my stakeholders to work with the data on their own instead of asking me time and time again how to change granularities, so I can spend more time doing what I love: Fixing GenAI errors (or whatever the much cooler analysts do these days) How would you like the feature to work - Like above Current Behaviour - Many clicks for few changes, therefore fewer changes, and more "quick 5-minute calls" with stakeholders
Hi Team, We have observed that we cannot update Program Tags in Marketo using API if any of the mandatory tags are missing for that particular program. We need to update program tags for hundreds of programs which have got synced from third party sources and have program tags missing. Updating them manually is a mammoth task. We are aware that this is working as designed from this link (https://nation.marketo.com/t5/knowledgebase/api-error-709-when-updating-tags-of-an-existing-marketo-program/ta-p/316739) . Although, we suggest that this should be changed in order to allow users to update program tags. The whole point of using Marketo API is to automate tedious and repetitive task. ThanksRipan Deb
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The OOTB Services and Servlet responses does not take care of link mapping for outbound URLs. As result of which , components such as Search Suggest and Search Results , Sling Model Exporters still contain long URLs . There should be some Link Rewriter Transformers or sling filters written for such cases to pass through these URLs via ResourceResolver.map(String resourcePath) . Use-case: SEO Improvements - Hide /content/project-name from Search results Current/Experienced Behavior: The URLs returned contain long URLS like /content/project-name/ Improved/Expected Behavior: The URLs should be rewritten using some transformer or link rewriter or Sling Filter before returning response back Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS Customer-name/Organization name: ODFL / Publicis Sapient Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable): The Above example uses below OOTB Servlet , com.adobe.cq.wcm.core.components.internal.servlets.SearchResultServlet
I think it would be a benefit to add "Last Opened" in the Action in the Audit Log. We our team creating workspaces, we want to make sure these are being used. If they are not after 1 year, these should be deleted, to keep user accessing most current and valid workspace. This also helps maintain not only workspaces, but filters as well.
Description - Add ability to convert a request to an overall program Why is this feature important to you - Often multiple projects are needed within one program How would you like the feature to work - Similar to converting a request to a project, except it converts it to a program Current Behaviour - Not possible right now
Hi All I recently explored "custom quarters" function and found that by imputing preferred date range I can achieve a fiscal years which than can be used for reporting (details, matrix, charts). The flaw is however that it stops users to use calendar quarters grouping. Id like to see an option in the setup to enable "Custom Years" Thanks Lukasz
As a technical solution provider, I would like to provide enhanced opportunity information across Marketo behaviors--and ideally, without the use of a separate CRM. However, when a CRM is attached to Marketo, there are several issues with translating Marketo opportunity activity: Activities such as Add to Opportunity/Remove from Opportunity/Update Opportunity (Activity IDs 34-36) use an integer as the identifying value for an opportunity. For example, a recent "Add to Opportunity" activity returns the following:{"id":98506929,"marketoGUID":"98506929","leadId":2054980,"activityDate":"2024-05-01T09:40:00Z","activityTypeId":34,"primaryAttributeValueId":72984,"primaryAttributeValue":"Opportunity Name - 2024","attributes":[{"name":"Is Primary","value":true},{"name":"Role","value":"Relevant Executive"}]}, This results in an Opportunity ID value of "72984." While I can work backward using the primaryAttributeValue to match via the opportunity name, this is less than ideal. There is also no reference to any externalOpportunityId, which would be used in this case (the instance is synced to an SFDC instance).Querying Marketo's own recording of opportunities independent of the CRM results in displaying a UUIDv4 value, but there is no reference to either the integer value on the Opportunity-related Activities value that could be used to cross-reference between systems:{"requestId":"11802#18fdeddf644","result":[{"seq":0,"marketoGUID":"be320968-423a-48e2-9730-e2e08df61fae","externalOpportunityId":"0061R00000m3kRLQAY","updatedAt":"2023-09-06T01:27:58Z","createdAt":"2018-12-17T15:43:08Z"}],"success":true}The marketoGUID is written activity-style rather than reading from the integers recorded in the opportunity-related activity. This leaves no way to resolve Marketo's own ID systems to tie the data together.Could you provide either the GUID in the activity or the integer in the main Opportunity query? Likewise, since something is translating the integral Opportunity ID to the Salesforce Opportunity Name, could the externalOpportunityId be exposed as a value on Opportunity-related activities? Otherwise, this data is disjointed and can only be poorly unioned together.
Description - I would be amazing if the revision comparison tool could toogle between "standard" side-by-side visualization (micro-changes, as is) into a more high level rule view.Meaning, the current version comparison tool helps to a certain distinct, but sometimes I would prefer if Tags could visualize the versions of the Rule, as a side by side view, but the same way the Rule look like when you regularily open them. Why is this feature important to you - The holistic view on structure of the Rule helps me understand the functioning better than the minized view as is. How would you like the feature to work - Have a different view option in the side by side view that lets you toggle the views. In this split screen, it should be possible to see all custom code of that specific version like normal Current Behaviour - only the optimized/minimalisitic view exists Let me know what you think
Similar to other areas in Workfront we would like to have the ability to assign board members different levels of access (sharing). E.g. a level to manage the entire boad (create new columns, settings etc.), whilst other levels have limited access (not able to add new members, nor to create columns, or to change the card filter). Currently, we also cannot change the board owner (as stated in another idea already - https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/workfront-ideas/boards-change-or-delete-the-board-owner/idi-p/622339).
Currently breaking down hours or expenses of certain categorisations against a project or task are challenging. Typically an integration needs to be put in place, to pull data aggregate it and write it back, this increases cost, latency and encourages data to be extracted and viewed from outhr solutions. Have the ability to write a query such as the External look up field, as a value (not a selection), that is triggered to run an update as and when that custom data form is updated would significantly enhance reporting flexibility and deliver greater insights.
Hi guys,in AEM it is possible to create technical accounts and use them for integrations:https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/experience-manager-learn/getting-started-with-aem-headless/authentication/service-credentialsWe would appreciate having the same opportunity in Workfront. These type of users have a clear advantage in terms of maintenance and security.Especially in conjuntion with the Workfront AEM Native Connector we are facing the issue that the user being used for the Fusion Workfront Module connection has to coexist in AEM. This coupling including the named disadvanteges in terms of maintenance and security are a risk for the production environment.As a workaround we are now forced to use the Fusion Authenticator module in order to work with technical accounts.
When editing an approval (task/project/issue) it would be nice to be able to reorder the stages rather than remove and add back in.
Description - The CJA Audit Log under Tools is a good feature, however, it is difficult to retrieve and analyze usage with a date range that spans more than one day. This is because only 200 rows of data are retrieved with each scroll and the Download feature does not asynchronously retrieve and download all data. Since all data for the date range must be manually scrolled/loaded into the UI before downloading, it is time consuming and difficult to analyze data offline for (as one example) a week date range which has more than 9,000 rows in our case. Why is this feature important to you - Needed to download and analyze data offline. For example, would be used to identify power users of the application so I know who to invite (of my 80 users) to a power users forum. How would you like the feature to work - After clicking download, the app should asynchronously download all data and make the file available when ready. Current Behaviour - Unfortunately, it only prepares a file with what has been retrieved into the UI and that may be a very small portion of the entire data set when using a range of dates.
Description - A Project's Issue has Status options including "In Progress" and "Closed".Why is this feature important to you - Awareness of the Status is crucial to the project for User Group A but not crucial for User Group B.How would you like the feature to work - It is preferred that changing the current Status of an Issue can be allowed only by User Group A.Current Behavior - Any Contributor to the Project can change the Status of any Issue in the Project. After looking through this with Support, and no solution, maybe a possibility is creating a View for User group B, a view that does not show the Status.
Description -Why is this feature important to you -How would you like the feature to work -Current Behaviour -
Description - Increase Workfront object's (project, task, issue, program) title to be full screen width across top header and wrap so can see the full title without mouse hover over. Why is this feature important to you - The object's title field is by far the most vital piece of information on an object. Our titles can be rather long when we have a prefix for the team, title/short description, year, and work type. And because we prefix many names the same, when the screen is standard size, all you see is the prefix which is not enough. Users must hover over the title and wait to see the full name. How would you like the feature to work - Workfront's object titles should span the full window length AND wrap if longer than window width so the full title can be seen without a mouse hover over. The other header information such as percent complete, assignees, status, etc should be in a row UNDERNEATH the title. This would also allow for more room to add more/different custom fields to the object header. Current Behaviour - Object title is so narrow that can only read a few characters even in 100%/standard zoom. See attachment
DescriptionAllow us to create Access Levels that have the same benefit of an Administrator by granting them View access to all records across the instance, but allows us to limit their ability to modify, create, or delete records. Why is this feature important to youWe have a number of accounts that are designated as service accounts. To protect our data from being inadvertently modified or deleted, we have to create a custom view-only Access Level that allows the service account to read records but not modify, create, or delete records. This means we have to spend a lot of time ensuring these service accounts are shared on all the relevant records in our instance. It would save a lot of time and energy if we could create Access Levels that allow an account unlimited read access, but limited write/delete access. How would you like the feature to workEnable an option on the Access Level editor to grant "Admin View Access" which would allows accounts using that Access Level to view/read any record in the instance while still allowing us to customize which objects the Access Level can create, modify, or delete. Current BehaviourWe cannot assign the Administrator Access Level to our service accounts without accepting the risk that those accounts may overwrite or delete data. We therefore create view-only Access Levels to assign, then spend a lot of time and energy making sure the service accounts are shared on everything. The ability for us to create a "view-only with admin rights" account would be safer and easier for us to manage.
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
